W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2005

RE: Significant W3C Confusion over Namespace Meaning and Policy

From: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 07:36:52 -0800
Message-ID: <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D1027673CE@RED-MSG-31.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Robin Berjon" <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>

comments inline 
 
-- 
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM
The road to to success is always under construction.   

________________________________

From: Robin Berjon [mailto:robin.berjon@expway.fr]
Sent: Wed 2/16/2005 6:10 AM
To: Dare Obasanjo
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Subject: Re: Significant W3C Confusion over Namespace Meaning and Policy



>
> No, they won't. At least not if you are using MSXML or System.Xml in the
> .NET Framework. The same problem exists with xml:base today. In both
> libraries, the assumption we made was that the XML namespace would be
> unchanging.

Based on what grounds did you decide to make such a bold assumption?

[Dare Obasanjo] That decision was made before my time but given the fact that this thread started because of similar discussions around other specifications I don't think it is as unreasonable as you claim to think that the number of names within a namespace will be unchanging. 


> For this reason, we don't allow users to specify a schema
> for the XML namespace but instead always use an internal schema with a
> fixed list of attribute declarations {xml:lang, xml:space}.

Is there anything in the XML Schema spec that makes this behaviour
conformant?

[Dare Obasanjo] Yes. Schema locations are hints not directives. A XML Schema validator can ignore locations and use schemas it already knows about. 

--
Robin Berjon
   Research Scientist
   Expway, http://expway.com/
Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2005 15:37:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:32 GMT