Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Mark D. Anderson" <email@example.com>
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 12:40:20 -0700
in REC-xml-names, section A.2 says in part:
"The Per-Element-Type Partitions
Each type in the All Element Types Partition has an associated namespace
in which appear the names of the unqualified attributes that are provided
for that element. This is a traditional namespace because the appearance
of duplicate attribute names on an element is forbidden by XML 1.0.
The combination of the attribute name with the element's type and namespace
name uniquely identifies each unqualified attribute.
In XML documents conforming to this specification, the names of all
qualified (prefixed) attributes are assigned to the global attribute
partition, and the names of all unqualified attributes are assigned
to the appropriate per-element-type partition."
However, section 5.3 says that this example is acceptable because
"the default namespace does not apply to attribute names:
<good a="1" b="2" />
<good a="1" n1:a="2" />
So does this mean that A.2 should be clarified to say that unqualified
attributes should not be assigned the per-element-type partition if it
obtained its namespace through a default namespace?
And what is a namespace-aware validator (is there such a thing?) supposed
to do here? If "good" was declared as
<!ATTLIST good a (2|3) 1 3 b CDATA 17>
then which have i defaulted, a global "b", or a "n1:b"?
and is the "a" attribute in violation of the dtd while n1:a is not?
is it in violation because it was not declared or has the wrong value?
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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
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)