Re: Next steps for the ARIA syntax discussion

On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 03:28:19 +0200, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>  
wrote:

> Charles McCathieNevile:
>> What it really means is that the appropriate namespace for these
>> attributes is the empty string - xmlns:aria="" if you are going to use
>> aria:aria-[something] in a namespace aware environment, but
>> aria-[something] will work perfectly correctly in both a
>> namespace-reliant environment, and in a namespace-unaware environment,
>> because of a careful and thoughtful design decision in the namespaces
>> specification that allows for the easiest possible transition between  
>> the
>> two kinds of environment.
>
> A small note: you cannot use xmlns:aria="" to declare that the aria
> prefix corresponds to no namespace.  The only way to have an attribute
> be in no namespace in markup is for it to have no prefix.
>
>   http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/#dt-prefix


Argh. This spec is hard to read, although short. I read the "In such  
declarations, the namespace name may not be empty" in line with RFC 2119,  
whereas I think you are reading it in a looser way where normal people  
would interpret it as that RFC-2119 equivalent 'In such declarations, the  
namespace name must not be empty'. I haven't tested this in practice  
either, although I note that the spec doesn't require processors actually  
check what the namespace values are in any event.

If I don't run out of time tonight I might try to write a test case for  
this.

cheers

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals   Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com