Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Michael Rossi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 11:30:26 -0500
John Cowan wrote:
> Colon-free attributes are not in the *same*
> namespace as the element, but rather in a (sub)namespace *defined*
> by the element.
But that doesn't buy us anything, what's the practical application of
such a subtle distinction?
> That's the rationale behind what the Rec says:
> there is no necessary connection between attribute foo in element A
> in namespace baz, and attribute foo in element B in namespace baz,
> but baz:foo is directly in namespace baz, independent of what element
> it appears in.
Again, this is undoubtedly _technically_ correct. But I can't see how it
helps in real applications. This should really be very simple: by definition
(and no, I haven't looked it up word-for-word) an attribute modifies an
element, it's metadata. It is absolutely, positively, unequivocably attached
to the element it modifies in every way. I don't see how it makes any sense
to say that it can be defined in some other namespace. What's the point?
Michael A. Rossi