- From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 14:39:50 -0400
- To: "John Boyer" <JBoyer@PureEdge.com>, "merlin" <merlin@baltimore.ie>
- Cc: <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
On Wednesday 05 June 2002 12:36 pm, John Boyer wrote: > Anyway, 3.3.3 seems to need a tiny bit of clarification. The first part > says "it has not been rendered by any output ancestor". Based on what > happens in 3.3.2, one could read 'it' as being the namespace prefix, or > one could and probably should interpret 'it' as meaning the namespace > node N. Neither of these is right. The first part should be "no output > ancestor has rendered a namespace prefix and value equal to those in N". Why are neither interprations correct? I'm not saying it might not benefit from clarification, but the whole of the rule starts to get difficult to parse as you've proposed [1] and I think either interpration is correct. If specificity is desired, I'd prefer to use the "prefix" [2]. (I've tried writing this a number of times... If we go with [1], it feels like we could do something to grammatically compact the sentence...) [1] no output ancestor has rendered a namespace prefix and value equal to those N, or the nearest output ancestor of its parent element that visibly utilizes the namespace prefix does not have a namespace node in the node-set with the same namespace prefix and value as N. [2] the prefix has not yet been rendered by any output ancestor, or the nearest output ancestor of its parent element that visibly utilizes the namespace prefix does not have a namespace node in the node-set with the same namespace prefix and value as N.
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2002 14:39:52 UTC