- From: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 12:45:16 +0700
- To: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>
- Cc: public-microxml@w3.org
I think we want the same thing. I am just spelling out what I believe are the consequences for spec. On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:37 PM, James Clark <jjc@jclark.com> wrote: >> >> For elements and attributes, I would say ... >> - documents SHOULD NOT use element/attribute names starting with xml >> (modulo whatever we decide on the "xml:" prefix) >> >> - processors MUST accept element/attribute names starting with xml, >> other than an "xmlns" attribute These points are both consequences of wanting names beginning with xml to be reserved for standardization. If in the future you may introduce a standardized attribute starting with xml, then what you want today is a) documents not to use attributes starting with xml b) processors to accept attributes starting with xml Without b), future documents using the newly standardized attributes would be rejected by old processors. > * The processor must report all elements and attributes beginning with > "xml", however, "xmlns" attributes are not permitted. Attributes beginning > with "xml" are reserved for XML core specifications. This is exactly what I want. > That last sentence (edited into proper spec speak) is the difference. I > would want MicroXML to say, as XML 1.0 does, that people should not create > their own "xml..." elements and attributes. Exactly. That is why I say "documents SHOULD NOT use element/attribute names starting with xml". James
Received on Thursday, 16 August 2012 05:46:10 UTC