Lists Home |
Date Index |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill de hÓra [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 3:13 PM
> To: Dare Obasanjo
> Cc: Tim Bray; XML Dev
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] RelaxNG question
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1/#soapbody
> I read the section and saw nothing that required the negation
> of non-namespaced names. Unless you're looking to
> overconstrain SOAP, perhaps you can explain your thinking, or
> get back on topic.
"All child element information items of the SOAP Body element information item:
SHOULD have a [namespace name] property which has a value, that is the name of the element SHOULD be namespace qualified."
Of course, nothing stops you from being pedantic and arguing that a SHOULD is not a requirement. There is also http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20030123/#section-attribute-node which may require banning attributes without a namespace name.
Anyway the point is that there are XML vocabularies that have this characteristic which unfortunately cannot be described by any of the popular XML schema languages.
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM
People can be divided into two types: those who still possess a fierce hunting instinct and those who pay to park.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.