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

RE: Positions on issue 19

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 11:02:00 -0700
Message-ID: <79107D208BA38C45A4E45F62673A434D0297CCA8@red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Asir S Vedamuthu" <asirv@webmethods.com>, "Martin Gudgin" <marting@develop.com>, "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Cc: "Allen Brown" <allenbr@microsoft.com>

Note that "no namespace" doesn't mean "the global null namespace". That
is, if I have unqualified "foo" in one context and unqualified "foo" in
another context then I can say nothing about how the two relate
regardless of them having the same unqualified name.


>"> > These elements are unqualified. Their namespace name is "" "
>Yes. These elements are unqualified. It does not say that they 
>are in the "" namespace.
>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"
Received on Tuesday, 29 May 2001 15:27:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:13 UTC