I'm aware that RDF uses namespaced attributes.
That doesn't bother me; I don't believe that there will be very many RDF
documents containing:
<rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.w3.org"
about="http://www.w3.org/not/really/I'm/just/kidding/">
If people are crazy enough to do that, I guess I don't have very much
sympathy.
> Simon St.Laurent scripsit:
> Note that RDF *demands* that attributes be namespaced; the control
ones
> like id, about, resource *must* belong to the RDF namespace, and the
> others that represent actual RDF properties (an optional use, you can
> use elements instead) *must* belong to a namespace other than the RDF
> one.
>
> Furthermore, XLink being an attribute-only architecture requires
> namespaced
> attributes.
>
> So please don't make general-purpose XML tools that outlaw namespaced
> attributes!
>
> --
> John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
>
> Please leave your values | Check your assumptions. In
> fact,
> at the front desk. | check your assumptions at
the
> door.
> --sign in Paris hotel | --Miles Vorkosigan
>
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com
