noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote: > John Bradely writes: > >> A IRI is NOT a URI, it would be WRONG to use a IRI in an XML >> document for name-spacing. >> >> The XML specs are clear and unambiguous use a URI. > > Well, they do seem to me to be clear, but I read them differently than you > do I'm afraid ;-). From the XML Namespaces 1.1 Recommendation [1]: > > "Abstract: XML namespaces provide a simple method for qualifying element > and attribute names used in Extensible Markup Language documents by > associating them with namespaces identified by IRI references." > > and indeed the formal definition [2] says: > > "[Definition: An XML namespace is identified by an IRI reference > [RFC3987]; element and attribute names may be placed in an XML namespace > using the mechanisms described in this specification. ]" > ... But <http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names11/> is the namespaces specification for XML 1.1, right? <http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names> (from the same date) still refers to RFC 3986 (URI). BR, JulianReceived on Wednesday, 6 August 2008 07:01:41 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:56:19 GMT