Why SAX needs namespace support

[james anderson]

I reread this note today and have a rather basic question about it:

Tim Bray wrote:
> 
> ...  The following two documents are namespace-equivalent:
> 
> <a xmlns:A='http://a.b.c'> | <a xmlns:A='http://a.b.c'
>                            |    xmlns:X='http://x.y.z'>
>   <b xmlns='http://a.b.c'> |   <A:b>
>     <c/>                   |     <A:c/>
>   </b>                     |   </A:b>
>   <d xmlns='http://z.y.z'> |   <X:d>
>     <A:e></A:e>            |     <A:e></A:e>
>   </d>                     |   </X:d>
> </a>                       | </a>
> 
> ...
> (surely everyone agrees that I get the same DOM tree from both
> instances)

I would have thought that the respective "a", "http://a.b.c::b", and
"http://x.y.z::d" elements comprised different attributes. ? Is there
something in the intent of the recommendation which I have overlooked?

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