- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 13:16:02 +0900
- To: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, ishida@w3.org, "Bjoern Hoehrmann" <derhoermi@gmx.net>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org
Hi, On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:42:50 +0900, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > > On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 ishida@w3.org wrote: >> >> Comment: >> Which version of XML Namespaces (and XML) is supported by the document? > > The working group discussed this. > > All of them. To make this clearer we have made the references to > [XMLNAMES] explicitly informative and made the prose say "e.g." before > mentioning [XMLNAMES]. > > > On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Felix Sasaki wrote: >> >> and that is the reason why it should say what happens if there is a >> clash in versions. Or it should add a note to warn the users of such >> clashes, e.g. saying >> >> "This specification does not provide mechanisms to avoid clashes which >> might occur due to different versions of markup languages. An example >> are clashes between different versions of XML. > > We are not aware of any possible clashes. > > > On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Felix Sasaki wrote: >> > >> > Could you give an example of such a "clash" or how mechanisms to avoid >> > them could look like? >> >> sorry, the XXX should have been like this: >> @namespace XXX url(YYY); >> and YYY should be http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names11/#dt-IRI > > The @namespace syntax is not part of Selectors. > > >> People who want to use IRIs for namespaces and XML 1.1. for NCName >> should be warned that such non matches can occur. > > We do not understand what you mean here. > > > On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Felix Sasaki wrote: >> > >> > > In #5, what would it mean for CSS Selectors to "support" any >> > > specific version of Namespaces in XML? >> >> to allow for s.t. like "@namespace foo url(xxx);", where "xxx" is >> conformant to >> 'xmlns:' NCName (NCName being definded at >> http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names11/#NT-NCName ). > > As the @namespace syntax is not part of Selectors, we do not understand > your request. > > > Please let us know if the changes mentioned above are not enough to > satisfy your request. > > Cheers, The i18n core working group is satisfied with your resolution. Thank you. Regards, Felix.
Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2006 04:16:10 UTC