[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 4:36 PM +0200 9/28/02, Julian Reschke wrote:
>"[Definition:] The attribute's value, a URI reference, is the namespace name
>identifying the namespace."
Yes, but the conformance section does not mandate adherence to this definition:
An XML document conforms to this specification if all other tokens in
the document which are required, for XML conformance, to match the
XML production for Name, match this specification's production for
NCName.
Nothing in there about requiring namespace names to be legal URIs.
>It is also fact that there is software that *does* check this constraint
>(for instance James Clark's Jing). So -- if any -- this shows that
>namespaces 1.1 should clarify *that* (right now, it seems to have the same
>problem as 1.0).
Yes. My own XOM does this too,. However, I'm not yet convinced this
is the correct behavior. It's an open question for XOM.
--
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| XML in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly, 2002) |
| http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian2/ |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0596002920/cafeaulaitA/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ |
| Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|
