Re: Entities and Namespaces

On Tue, 28 Sep 1999, Dan Connolly wrote:

>> Currently, the above document is not even well-formed, because the
>> entities have not been declared (after all, there is no DOCTYPE).
> Exactly.
 
>> But even if they _were_ declared, there would still be no way to
>> make "θ" mean something different depending on the active
>> namespace!
> Bingo again.

Ok, so at least I seem to understand what I'm talking about. Makes a
change as far as XML goes...

 
>> Will Schema cover this?
> Good question. It's discussed in the recent draft:
>: "The provision within XML Schema: Structures of a mechanism for
>: defining parsed entities presents problems for the relationship
>: between schema-validity and XML 1.0 well-formedness, since
>: references to entities declared only in a schema are undefined from
>: the XML 1.0 perspective."
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#conformance-schemaValidity

Aha. I missed that in my cursory examination of that document. Thanks.

 
>> If you are not the appropriate people to answer this, could you
>> point me to an appropriate mailing list? Thanks.
> If you have a comment/question on the schema spec, please
> send it to the address on the title page:
> www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
> (public archive at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/)

Great. Will do.

Thanks again,

[BTW, Dan, could you update me on our Link: header spec? :-) Cheers!]
-- 
Ian Hickson
: Is your JavaScript ready for Nav5 and IE5?
: Get the latest JavaScript client sniffer at 
: http://developer.netscape.com/docs/examples/javascript/browser_type.html

Received on Tuesday, 28 September 1999 19:19:34 UTC