[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 03:05:28PM +0200, Erik Wilde wrote:
> AndrewWatt2000@aol.com wrote:
> > I hesitate to comment on this having twice had my knuckles rapped this
> > week - by Tim Bray and Norman Walsh - for believing what a W3C Rec
> > states... :) ... but the Namespace in XML Recommendation seems to say
> > the opposite to what you "repeat, ad nauseam":
>
> i guess the infoset gets it just right by defining that namespace
> declarations are in fact attributes, but special attributes. telling
> people that namespace declarations are not attributes seems to be
> motivated (at least i think so) by the attempt to save people from poor
> implementations which are not smart enough to see namespace declarations
> as special attributes (and maybe they should even complain if people try
> to create 'regular' attributes which appear to have namespace
> declaration syntax).
My view is that there is simply a terminology overlapping, sometimes
"attribute" means attribute at a serialization level, and sometimes
"attribute" means a parsed representation of an attribute (for DOM or
the Infoset). The namespace REC simply state that at a serialization
level the mechanism used is attributes, but the internal representation
of an parsed namespace information is usually not the one of a simple
attribute, that's all ...
Daniel
--
Daniel Veillard | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard@redhat.com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
|
