W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > May 2001

Re: Positions on issue 19

From: Martin Gudgin <marting@develop.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 20:16:30 +0100
Message-ID: <002d01c0e873$df2f3570$0300a8c0@greyarea>
To: "Asir S Vedamuthu" <asirv@webmethods.com>, "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>, "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Cc: "Allen Brown" <allenbr@microsoft.com>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Asir S Vedamuthu" <asirv@webmethods.com>
To: "Gudgin, Martin" <marting@develop.com>; "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen"
<henrikn@microsoft.com>; "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Cc: "Allen Brown" <allenbr@microsoft.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 6:40 PM
Subject: Re: Positions on issue 19


Thank you Martin. I read thru the schema pointers you sent me. And, I
couldn't find any pointers to -

"> > These elements are unqualified. Their namespace name is "" "

Yes. These elements are unqualified. It does not say that they are in
the ""
namespace.

<mjgbegin/>
What's the difference?

1.    The element is unqualified

2.    The element has a namespace name of ""

3.    The element is in the namespace whose URI is the empty string

4.    The element is not in any namespace


Given that it is impossible to *explicitly* place an element into the
namespace whose name is "" to me these are all exactly the same. Qualified
elements have namespace names which are not "". Unqualified elements have
the namespace name ""

I love to be able to say that unqualified elements don't have a namespace
name but SAX and DOM won't let me... The Infoset says that namespace name
has 'no value' for unqualified elements. I'm personally happy with the idea
that "" is 'no value'. Certainly all the APIs ( which are, after all, just
expressions of the Infoset ;-) ) return "" rather than null.
<mjgend/>



The reference [1] that I have with me says,

"if the URI reference in a default namespace declaration is empty, then
unprefixed elements in the scope of the declaration are not considered
to be
in any namespace"

<mjgbegin/>

I don't find it *too* inconsistent to say 'is not in any namespace' and 'has
a namespace name of ""' but I'll understand if other people don't feel the
same way...

Cheers

Gudge

<mjgend/>
Received on Tuesday, 29 May 2001 15:18:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:01 GMT