RE: A little courtesy, please

John Cowan wrote:

> it remains both well-formed and namespace-valid 
> (yes, I know
> that term is not defined anywhere).

I offer a working term "namespace-well-formed" which means both well-formed
according to XML 1.0 and compliant to Namespaces in XML.  I expect that when
namespaces are rolled into XML, the term "well-formed" will expand to cover
"namespace-well-formed".

To restate using this new term:  I'm worried about making the
namespace-well-formededness of an XML document dependent upon its context.