Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: John Cowan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: XML Dev <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 17:15:20 -0500
Mark Birbeck wrote:
> How not quite? A namespace is a set of unique entries *by definition*.
> That's what they are - a set of unique entries. You can't have a 'set of
> unique entries' that contains a duplicate.
That is not the definition of "namespace" used by REC-xml-names.
Clause 1 specifically denies that XML namespaces are sets.
> > An element can have the same name as a global
> > attribute without problem.
> True. But they are not in the same namespace. According to A.2 the
> element would be in the 'all element types' partition, and the global
> attribute would be in the 'global attribute' partition.
They are in separate partitions of the same namespace.
> Of course, this might not be the source of your contradiction either.
Appendix A says that unprefixed attributes are assigned to one of the
per-element-type partitions of the namespace. It also says that
unprefixed attributes are assigned to "associated namespaces".
Clause 5.3 is not involved and I shouldn't have dragged it in.
But none of this matters much because Appendix A is not normative.
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan firstname.lastname@example.org
You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn.
You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn.
Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)