Namespaces and XML validation

Charles Frankston cfranks at
Sun Aug 9 06:07:35 BST 1998

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Megginson [mailto:david at]
> Sent: Saturday, August 08, 1998 5:48 AM
> To: XML Dev
> Subject: RE: Namespaces and XML validation
> Charles Frankston writes:
>  > I do not believe the new namespace proposal with local scoping
>  > makes [DTD validation] any harder to do than the old PI based
>  > namespace proposal. 
> This claim is incorrect, though the culprit is the local scoping and
> defaulting rather than the declaration mechanism itself.
> XML 1.0 DTDs know only about one-part, unresolved names (i.e. "foo" or
> "bar:foo", not null + "foo" or "" + "foo").

Yes, David, but you're taking me somewhat too literally here (this is what I
meant about being "insufficiently imaginative").  If I rephrased what I
wrote as:

"It is not too hard to evolve the concept of today's DTD validation to
support two part locally scoped names (including the default prefix)."

Would you still disagree with it?

I believe this can be done -- it would obviously not be the validation as
specified in XML 1.0, but a sensible evolution of the same.  However, as I
also said in my post, it would be essentially worthless, because it would
encourage placing the prefix in the DTDs.  I believe even this can be dealt
with, but I'd rather spend the efforts on a new schema language, than
patching DTDs.

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