Re: [xml-dev] [ANNOUNCE] New MicroXML draft available

["Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>]

So, if you had the two documents:

<book foo:author="John" xmlns:foo="http://example.com/book"/>

and:

<book bar:author="John" xmlns:bar="http://example.com/book"/>

are they considered the same?

What part does the MicroXML parser play in this interpretation, and what 
part the application?

Thanks,

Pete Cordell
Codalogic Ltd
Interface XML to C++ the easy way using C++ XML
data binding to convert XSD schemas to C++ classes.
Visit http://codalogic.com/lmx/ or http://www.xml2cpp.com
for more info
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Cowan" <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
To: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
Cc: "Stephen D Green" <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>; "Peter Flynn" 
<peter@silmaril.ie>; <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 6:32 PM
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] [ANNOUNCE] New MicroXML draft available


>
> Pete Cordell scripsit:
>
>> I just re-read James' original proposal
>> (http://blog.jclark.com/2010/12/microxml.html to save others like me
>> trying to remember where it is) and I think he is saying that there would
>> be a registry for things like the xlink namespace prefix so that
>> xlink:href could be used without a namespace declaration.  It's then up
>> to your application whether you recognise these predefined names, and
>> their just opaque names to the XML parser.  I prefer this idea.
>
> That approach is perfectly valid with MicroXML (as described in my draft).
> The only requirements in Section 4.2 (Attributes in Namespaces) have to
> do with not misusing the xml: prefix and its associated namespace.
> Everything else is SHOULD or MAY.
>
> -- 
> John Cowan   cowan@ccil.org    http://ccil.org/~cowan
> [R]eversing the apostolic precept to be all things to all men, I usually 
> [before
> Darwin] defended the tenability of the received doctrines, when I had to 
> do
> with the [evolution]ists; and stood up for the possibility of [evolution] 
> among
> the orthodox --thereby, no doubt, increasing an already current, but quite
> undeserved, reputation for needless combativeness.  --T. H. Huxley
>