[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Joern Clausen wrote:
> I don't think that is a flaw. I repeat my question, which was not
> answered yet: Why are only elements and attributes subject to a
> namespace definition, but not entities?
There was some discussion during the development of the NS spec, and I
think it came down to the point that elements and attributes are
structural, while entities are not. To take a simple analogy, in C++
variables, class names, and functions can be namespace-qualified, but
preprocessor macros cannot. XML processing instructions were a grey
area, since they are sort-of structural.
If we could go back in time and I were appointed Infallible Grand
Dictator of XML, I would not have allowed entities in the first place
(though I might allow named character references of some kind).
Realistically, though, some people do like entities quite a bit, so
it's unlikely that they would have been dropped even if we had known
then what we know now.
All the best,
David
|
