fixing (just) namespaces and validation

[james anderson]

David Carlisle wrote:
> 
> [in response to my claim, that]
> 
> > It is the parsers which cause the problem by ignoring the information
> > provided.
> 
> ...
> 
> Ah interesting. But then the `problem' is that there is no REC or NOTE
> or hint or suggestion from anyone in authority that namespace aware
> validating parsers are _supposed_ to interpret xmlns: attribute
> declarations in this way.

As the recommendation does not say anything about this, it does not prohibit
it. There was a discussion about this nine months ago (upon release of
rec-xml-names-19990114), at which time the authoritative opinion was that such
an interpretation was not intended by the specification, as it would invert
the validity-status of some documents. I argued then, and remain convined,
that that effect would be beneficial.

>


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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
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)