[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: ANN: SAX Filters for Namespace Processing

• From: Tom Bradford <bradford@d...>
• To: "David E. Cleary" <davec@p...>
• Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:55:30 -0700

"David E. Cleary" wrote:
> > According to the XML Schema re-interpretation of namespace semantics,
> > they are alternative representations of the same thing, one with
> > elementFormDefault="qualified" and one with
> > elementFormDefault="unqualified" (which is the newly invented usage, and
> > the default!)
> 
> They are not the same thing, and we have hours of debates in the Schema WG
> to attest to this fact. There is absolutly no reinterpretaion of namespace
> semantics in XML Schema.

I wouldn't take credit in any way for being responsible for W3C
Schemas.  They're an embarrassment.  But more to the point, having
local, unqualified elements creates ambiguity in the namespace model and
goes against nearly all of the best practices that the W3C has been
preaching regarding namespaces for so long.  Now, if you had an
application layer attribute that was something other than a legal
namespace declaration, I could see having unqualified elements (as long
as they weren't part of a previsouly defined default namespace)  But
then again, namespaces are another spec that's an embarrassment.

-- Tom

• References:
  • RE: ANN: SAX Filters for Namespace Processing
    • From: "David E. Cleary" <davec@p...>

• Prev by Date: RE: SAX2 bugs -- please file!
• Next by Date: RE: Namespaces, W3C XML Schema (was Re: ANN: SAX Filters forNamespaceProcessing)
• Previous by thread: RE: ANN: SAX Filters for Namespace Processing
• Next by thread: Re: ANN: SAX Filters for Namespace Processing
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread