Asir Vedamuthu writes: >> I can't immediately detect whether you rule >> out using the default namespace > > Per LC draft, > > * In the context of schema component designators, we rely on xmlns() > XPointer scheme. So, default namespace is ruled out. > > * In the context of schema component paths in an XML document, namespace > prefixes will be bound in the conventional way (using the [in-scope > namespaces] property of the element information item). > > * In the context of schema component paths in other host languages, and XML > applications, they will define their own namespace binding rules. > > Given these, my question is - should we still rule out default namespace? Yes -- out once, out always, or life gets too confusing. No -- use the local rules. I am stuck . . . ht -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh Half-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2005 17:23:59 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 23 October 2007 06:13:36 GMT