W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-names-editor@w3.org > June 1999

RE: namespace for unqualified attributes

From: Andrew Layman <andrewl@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 13:30:16 -0700
Message-ID: <5BF896CAFE8DD111812400805F1991F708AAF684@RED-MSG-08>
To: "'Paul Rabin'" <prabin@odi.com>
Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, xml-names-editor@w3.org
Unqualified attributes are intended to act exactly as they do in XML 1.0
without namespaces.  They are specific to their element type.  Two
attributes with the same name on different element types are distinct
attributes.  Attribute names are not in any global namespace, most certainly
they are not immediately in the same namespace as contains their element.  

Thanks for encouraging us to make our wording more clear.

I cannot speak to what wisdom or foolishness might be in the XSLT or DOM
drafts.

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Rabin [mailto:prabin@odi.com]
Sent: Friday, June 04, 1999 1:05 PM
To: Andrew Layman
Cc: Tim Bray; xml-names-editor@w3.org
Subject: RE: namespace for unqualified attributes


Andrew,

Thanks.  I did note the model described in the appendices, but am concerned
that it is not reflected in the normative text.

Is the intent that unqualified attributes have no namespace URI of their
own, but that for purposed of matching two such attributes (for instance,
in XSLT), the expanded attribute name should be used?

I note that the XSLT draft uses the more familiar <URI, local name> model
of expanded name for purposes of matching, and that this is also the model
in the DOM level 2 draft.

	Paul
Received on Friday, 4 June 1999 16:30:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:42 GMT