W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-names-issues@w3.org > July to September 1998

RE: xml-namespaces

From: Richards, Frank (RTIS) <frank.richards@reedtech.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 08:40:29 -0400
Message-ID: <DD35E0D1549FD11194C500805FBB230489B2BA@nagexserver.reedtech.com>
To: "'James Clark'" <jjc@jclark.com>, "Richards, Lisa (RTIS)" <lisa.richards@reedtech.com>
Cc: "'xml-names-issues@w3.org'" <xml-names-issues@w3.org>, "Richards, Frank (RTIS)" <frank.richards@reedtech.com>, "'abrahams@acm.org'" <abrahams@acm.org>
The objection does indeed pertain to namespace awareness: Even though an xml
1.0 parser will accept <edi:address> and <publish:address> as perfectly
acceptable element names, it will not be able to resolve the references to
say /dtds/edi.ent and /dtds/publish.ent, and if it could, it couldn't deal
with the actual declarations being <!ELEMENT address, in both cases.

We don't see how an xml 1.0 parser can do this without being modified, and
thus becoming an xml 1.0' parser.

Frank Richards

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	James Clark [SMTP:jjc@jclark.com]
> Sent:	Friday, August 21, 1998 7:11 PM
> To:	Richards, Lisa (RTIS)
> Cc:	'xml-names-issues@w3.org'; Richards, Frank (RTIS);
> 'abrahams@acm.org'
> Subject:	Re: xml-namespaces
> Richards, Lisa (RTIS) wrote:
> > It appears that a document containing qualified names is unlikely to be
> > valid in terms of the unmodified 1.0 spec, so the namespace spec must
> > provide its own interpretation of any such document.
> This is not correct.  XML namespaces do not change what valid means. 
> "Valid" continues to mean exactly what it means in XML 1.0.  As far as
> DTD processing is concerned a colon has no special meaning.
> Future work on schemas will provide namespace awareness.
> James
Received on Monday, 24 August 1998 08:44:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:43:30 UTC