Re: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.

[Peter Piatko <piatko@research.telcordia.com>]

FWIW the following is in the normative part of the namespace rec [1]:

"The combination of the universally managed URI namespace and the document's
own namespace produces identifiers that are universally unique."

Note that it talks about identifiers (not types).

Thanks,

Peter

[1] End of 2nd paragraph after
http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xml-names-19990114/#dt-identical

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Piatko" <piatko@research.telcordia.com>
To: "Michael Brennan" <Michael_Brennan@allegis.com>; "'Evan Lenz'"
<elenz@xyzfind.com>; "Ronald Bourret" <rpbourret@rpbourret.com>;
<xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 10:51 PM
Subject: Re: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Brennan" <Michael_Brennan@allegis.com>
> To: "'Evan Lenz'" <elenz@xyzfind.com>; "Ronald Bourret"
> <rpbourret@rpbourret.com>; <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 8:39 PM
> Subject: RE: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
>
> > > From: Evan Lenz [mailto:elenz@xyzfind.com]
> > > The namespace spec never reinforced this for me. I think this
> > > goes well
> > > beyond what the namespace spec dictates.
> >
> > I would have agreed with you just a few minutes ago. However, I just
went
> > back and reviewed the XML Namespace spec. Sure enough, in section A.2
> > (http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xml-names-19990114/#ns-breakdown), you'll
> > find the following language:
> >
> >     The All Element Types Partition
> >     All element types in an XML namespace appear in this
> >     partition. Each has a unique local part; the combination
> >     of the namespace name and the local part uniquely
> >     identifies the element type.
> >
> > Right or wrong, that's what the spec says. So either XML Schema is
wrong,
> or
> > XML Namespaces is wrong.
>
> What you reference is actually in a non-normative part of the spec.  So
Evan
> is technically correct (I believe).
>