Re: MicroXML design goals

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 9:19 AM, James Clark <jjc@jclark.com> wrote:

> > I think the main thing is that we do not have to support some version of
> XML
> > namespaces in order to admit xml:, but we do have to do so in order to
> admit
> > all prefixed attributes.
>
> How so? Our compatibility requirements relate to XML 1.0 only, not XML
> 1.0 + XML Namespaces.
>

I was thinking less about conformance requirements than mechanics, but I
think I get your point.

My thinking was: If we only admit xml: then we do not need to allow
namespace declarations, nor include localname/prefix/namespace in the data
model., but that we allowed prefixed attributes in general we would want to
support namespace declarations.

But you're just saying go back to XML 1.0, where an attribute has a name,
and that name can include a colon, and there's nothing special in the data
model about a name with a colon (except that "xml:" is reserved).

I'd have to think about this, and in particular the consequence of having
MicroXML documents not XMLNS compatible. You're right that we have not set
XMLNS compat as a goal, but I admit that considering such a large break
does give me pause.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                       http://uche.ogbuji.net
Founding Partner, Zepheira        http://zepheira.com
http://wearekin.org
http://www.thenervousbreakdown.com/author/uogbuji/
http://copia.ogbuji.net
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ucheogbuji
http://twitter.com/uogbuji