Namespaces in XML: 3.1 the example [2]

james anderson James.Anderson at
Wed Apr 1 16:08:59 BST 1998

David Megginson wrote:

> james anderson writes:
>  ...
>  > 2. if the schema is present, should the processor permit local
>  > additions to the namespace, that is the introduction of names which
>  > are not present in the external definition?  should the processor
>  > permit redefinition of existing names from the namespace?
> This would go against the basic principle of namespaces (globalisation
> and uniquification of names), since two documents could create
> different extensions to the same namespace.  ...

which is ok, if the issue is architectural forms, but bad if one is talking
about namespaces...


> I'm not certain that I understand the issue here -- why would someone
> not bring additional element types in from a different namespace,
> instead of adding private extensions to an existing one?

to "capture" an entity definition.

>  > (or rather, it's almost possible: there's a small problem, that the
>  > wd-standard precludes qualified entity names. why?)
> The namespace spec allows element type names, attribute names, and PI
> targets to be associated with a URI.  (External) entity and notation
> names are already associated with a URI.

but not identifiable.

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as:
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list