IV. please specify the precedence rules for attribute "specification". there are three states in the following matrix for which i cannot yet specify the effective binding: (ed = element default, cd = context default, eb = element binding, cb = context binding) default presence in attribute declaration attribute presence in element -- -- | -- ed | cd -- | cd ed --------------------------------------- | unbound | ed | cd | ? ? | -- -- | | | | ? ? | ---------------------------------------- | | | | | -- eb | eb | eb | eb | eb | ---------------------------------------- | | ? ? | | ? ? | cb -- | cb | ?* ? | cb! | ? ? | ---------------------------------------- | | | | | cb eb | eb | eb | eb | eb | ---------------------------------------- *: xml-dev discussion has implied that the context binding takes precedence, but that would lead to capturing prefix bindings on included external entities - which is not necessarily to be recommended. (see, for example, http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/9808/0152.html) !: modulo the other ambiguities i would suggest that the attribute declaration in the dtd should be afforded a lexical scope which takes precedence over the dynamic scope of any bindings in the element stream.Received on Thursday, 6 August 1998 16:51:36 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Tuesday, 12 April 2005 12:17:16 GMT