Re: XML 1.0 Namespaces comment - editorial error; ambiguity?

>      All other tokens in the document which are REQUIRED, for
>      XML 1.0 well-formedness, to match the XML production for
>      Name, MUST match this specification's production for NCName.
> 
> The last comma should not be there.

I agree.

> Section 3 says:
> 
>      Element names MUST NOT have the prefix xmlns.
> 
> Should that say something like:
> 
>      Element prefixed names MUST NOT have the prefix xmlns.
> 
> to reduce the risk of misinterpretation?

I don't believe there is any ambiguity.  The context is a constraint
entitled "Reserved Prefixes and Namespace Names" so it is clear that
"prefix" means the prefix part of a prefixed name.

> That is,
> that wording could be taken to mean that "<xmlnsxyz/>",
> "<xmlnsxyz:localpart/>", and "<prefix:xmlnsxyz/>" are illegal.

In these cases "xmlns" is not a prefix in the sense being discussed.

> (Also, the prefix "xmlns" should probably be put in boldface as it is
> earlier in the paragraph.)

Bold is generally used when a term is being introduced.  It might make
sense to put it in typewriter font like the namespace names.

-- Richard