[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
David Carlisle wrote:
>
> > In which ways is this set of names not a namespace?
>
> It could have been defined as being a namespace but the namespace REC (in 5.2) says
>
> If the URI reference in a default namespace declaration is empty, then
> unprefixed elements in the scope of the declaration are not considered
> to be in any namespace.
>
> which explictly says that that set is _not_ a namespace, so presumably
> it isn't.
>
It says that "[they] are not considered to be in any namespace," which claim, as I noted, is bogus. That is, it is "spurious,
fictitions, and a sham", and is inconsistent with the earlier definition.
So what does one call this 'set of names which has the name "", but which one can for historical reasons not call a namespace'?
...
|
