W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlp-comments@w3.org > July 2004

Re: Issue 486 closed

From: Jun Fujisawa <fujisawa.jun@canon.co.jp>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 01:05:29 +0900
Message-Id: <p0600100dbd19b35bfed2@[172.23.45.3]>
To: "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
Cc: <xmlp-comments@w3.org>

Hi Martin,

At 3:27 AM -0700 04.7.13, Martin Gudgin wrote:
>You raised an issue, number 486[1] regarding presence of the XOP
>namespace declaration on the root element in an example in the XOP
>specification[1]. The Working Group agrees that the example is unclear
>and will amend the example so that the namespace declaration appears on
>the Include element.

Does this means that no XOP namespace declaration occurs in the
Original infoset of the revised example, and that the namespace
declaration appears on each xop:Include element in the XOP Infoset
instead?

<m:photo xmlmime:content-type='image/png'>
     <xop:Include href='cid:http://example.org/me.png'/
         xmlns:xop='http://www.w3.org/2003/12/xop/include'>
</m:photo>
<m:sig xmlmime:content-type='application/pkcs7-signature'>
     <xop:Include href='cid:http://example.org/my.hsh'/
         xmlns:xop='http://www.w3.org/2003/12/xop/include'>
</m:sig>

If so, I'm happy with the suggested resolution.

-- 
Jun Fujisawa
<mailto:fujisawa.jun@canon.co.jp>
Received on Tuesday, 13 July 2004 12:09:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:42:28 GMT