Bob Foster wrote:
> Where did the "http://www.w3.org/2000/xmlns/" URI come from? The
> Namespaces In XML spec specifically says: "The prefix xmlns is used only
> for namespace bindings and is not itself bound to any namespace name."
>
> Am I missing some errata, or is there some complexity-multiplying going
> on here? It sure seems like a SAX feature that should be dropped should
> not be used to justify contradicting the namespaces recommendation.
You are missing an erratum to NS 1.0, and the NS 1.1 spec (as well as
DOM 2 which IIRC was the first to cite it).
See notably:
http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-names-19990114-errata
(NE05)
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-names11-20040204/#ns-decl
(towards the end of section 3)
--
Robin Berjon
