- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:10:20 +0100
- To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- CC: w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Hi Dave, Another nit: > > 2. The grammar will be corrected to require namespace-qualification There has been a suggestion that the future spec may use a different technique to represent the RDF/XML language, e.g. XML Schema. We should make sure that the spec writers are free to represent the same resolution in these other forms. Perhaps a note to that effect? And thinking in terms of XML schema/infoset, the key thing we require is that attributes have an associated namespace. I'm wondering whether that is the right level of abstraction to capture the requirement. Right now that means that prefix's must be used. But if XML were to change so that there was another way to express namespaces for attributes, would it be desirable if we were neutral to that change. Brian
Received on Friday, 25 May 2001 06:10:59 UTC