[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Carlisle" <davidc@nag.co.uk>
=>
>
> > However, I would think that in the case above that "attr2" should belong
to
> > the default namespace, not the namespace that "elem2" belongs to.
>
> I don't see why.
> Even if you thought that would have been a better design in the
> beginning it is a far more radical change than Simon has proposed and
> would break nearly all existing uses of attributes.
> The overwhelming majority of attributes in existing document are
> unprefixed. You would change the way _all_ these are reported.
I agree. It is a radical change. However, the reasoning behind it was that
you currently have no way of using attributes defined in the default
namespace, which seems counter-intuitive to me.
In the end, however, I agree with Dare that the better thing would be to get
rid of default namespaces. In some ways, my use of the ":" did the same
thing, but his solution is much cleaner, simpler, and 100% compatible with
the current Rec.
---
Seairth Jacobs
seairth@seairth.com
|
