[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> Then according to the rule we're proposing, nothing significant about
> the attribute has changed at all. The namespace, which is the
> important matter, is the same.
so now I'm confused. It seems to me you are proposing that in the
first, unprefixed, case the namespace of the attribute would be (or
could be considered as) the namespace of the element (associated with
the prefix x:) which is not the same as the current interpretation.
> The distinction between local and global attributes is only a way to
> get at the important information i.e. what is the namespace of the
> attr.
No you don't need to have a local/global distinction to get at the name
of the attribute. That is explicit in the syntax. The distinction is
that globally defined attributes (essentially a namespace invention as
far as XML is concerned) are defined, and can be referred to independly
of any element.
Assuming some conventional namespace bindings
html:img
is a way of refering to the the img element of html.
There is no such qname that uniquely refers to the href attribute
of that element. This is a good thing. Even within HTML attributes
with the same name are not always directly compararble and many of them
wouldn't make sense if used on elements from other namespaces.
with the proposed change the href attribute of html:img would be
considered to be in the xhtml namespace and equivalent to an attribute
html:href. that means that the html namespace now must have such an
attribute that can be globally referred to as
html:href
so suddenly you have a global attribute which you can put on other
elements
<foobar html:href=...
> BTW, I think you fundamentally misunderstand XLink. It's an
> architecture, which is why they made the right decision not to use
> elements. The fact that an errant intermediate draft used elements
> has no more bearing on this discussion than the fact that Namespaces
> used to use unscoped Processing Instructions.
I disagree that it is not relevant. we were using xlink as an example
which happens not to use elements. I mentioned as an aside that a draft
did. But pehaps you would have preferred that we stick to a made up
example the point is that your rule would make the interpretation
of xxx:yyy="foo" different depending on whether it was on an element in
the xxx: namespace.
David
_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.
|
