Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 11:17, Leigh Dodds wrote:
> > I _think_ it's because of QNames in attribute/element values, but it may
> > also have to do with canonicalization discussions. I seem to remember
> > it being an issue for the long-ago XML Fragment discussions, but I'm not
> > sure.
> If that's the case then why not limit 'in-scope' to mean those namespaces
> used by the element, or it's direct element or attribute content?
> Wouldn't that staunch the bleeding?
It might, but it's a lot of work just to figure out whether you need to
keep something around or throw it away, and your results don't apply to
the child elements.
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!