Re: Namespaces,

["Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>]

On 01 Aug 2001 00:00:39 +0100, Richard Tobin wrote:
> >Sorry, I was not clear. By "unqualified child elements" I mean
> >unqualified child elements being interpreted as being in the namespace
> >of their parent. XML Schemas did introduce this.
> 
> But that isn't what XML Schemas does.  Rather it allows a schema for
> some namespace to include declarations for elements in no namespace,
> provided they are contained within an element from the namespace.
> 
> That is, it provides an interpretation of elements in no namespace as
> being *scoped by* their containing, namespaced element.  It doesn't
> put them in the namespace, at least not literally.

But such scoping will not be understood by applications which aren't
bound to the PSVI.  Right now, that's most applications, and I hope in
the future that continues to be most applications.

It effectively introduces a requirement that applications support W3C
XML Schemas, not just XML 1.0+Namespaces, in order to be able to process
these documents even at the level of figuring out which components are
in which vocabulary.

Maybe that's a convenient way to force users to work with W3C XML
Schema, but it seems a horrendous trap to me.