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

RE: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the

• To: "'Thomas B. Passin'" <tpassin@c...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 09:10:21 -0500

So adopt the principle of least surprise:  an unqualified 
attribute gets the namespace of the element.

If that doesn't work, then namespaces really are a 
disaster.  It can't take a mathematician to do this 
work and understand it.  That perverts what markup 
is for and has been about prior to the namespaces rec. 

Simon and Uche are right. 

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas B. Passin [mailto:tpassin@c...]

 I could have been reasonably happy either way, but what does not work for
me is this mix-and-match situation where some systems do it one way and
others do it another way.

• Prev by Date: Re: Global/Local attributes
• Next by Date: RE: Markup perspective not code (was RE: Re: URIs, concrete)
• Previous by thread: RE: Re: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the
• Next by thread: FYI - Interesting news regarding the ebXML 2.0 messaging specification
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread