Re: productions [NS 1, 10, 11, 17]

At 11:32 AM 8/17/98 +0700, James Clark wrote:
>I would actually go further and not provide productions for the
>namespace declarations at all:
>
>In my view, the right processing model for the namespace draft is that
>there's a two-stage process:

The argument is persuasive but I don't think we should get into 
micromanaging the processing model.  Reason is that in may apps
you're going to be in SAX-land or equivalent and there will be
no tree normaliation going on.  I think the grammar, as amended
due to the input here, is quite clear.

>The spec needs to say how they are compared (only for the purposes of
>6.4 as far as I can see).  It could just say you compare the strings
>character for character.  The URN spec (RFC 2141) specifies lexical
>equivalence for URNs:

Ouch; these are URIs, not URNs.  Can we get away with weasel words
simply saying that they have to be lexically equivalent per the
governing spec?  I've tried this. Dan? -Tim