W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > May 1997

RE: SD5 - Namespaces - New Version 2

From: Andrew Layman <andrewl@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 16:58:24 -0700
Message-ID: <7BB61B44F197D011892800805FD4F792A4BFF9@RED-03-MSG.dns.microsoft.com>
To: "'Paul Grosso'" <paul@arbortext.com>, w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Fair question.

<BOOK lib:loaned-to="Andrew">Last of the Mohecans</BOOK>

<BOOK>
	<TITLE>Philosophy: Who Needs It</TITLE>
	<PRICE banks:CURRENCY="USD">6.95</PRICE>	
</BOOK>

We can get some integration of concepts across various doctypes by
sharing attributes.

--Andrew Layman
   AndrewL@microsoft.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Paul Grosso [SMTP:paul@arbortext.com]
> Sent:	Friday, May 23, 1997 4:26 PM
> To:	w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
> Subject:	RE: SD5 - Namespaces - New Version 2
> 
> At 15:39 1997 05 23 -0400, Arjun Ray wrote:
> >
> >Sorry, my fault for overloading "qualify". Assuming ':' is the name
> >component separator, I was basically asking about a construction like
> >
> >   ... <X:FOO Y:BAR="baz"> ...
> >
> >where within the same start-tag, an attribute is drawn from some
> other
> >namespace than the element. Is this kosher?
> >
> 
> I don't think you'd want to allow this, and I'm not even sure it makes
> sense:  by definition of what it means to be an attribute (even in
> the natural language sense), how can "an attribute of some element in
> the Y namespace" be an attribute of "the FOO element in the X
> namespace"?
> 
> Actually, please just consider that a rhetorical question (we don't
> need
> the extra email philosophizing on this concept).  Just explain the
> user
> requirement this could possibly address if any.
> 
> paul
Received on Friday, 23 May 1997 19:58:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:26 UTC