- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 16:06:05 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4261
------- Comment #2 from cmsmcq@w3.org 2007-05-01 16:06 -------
[Personal comment]
The original description asks
In fact they ascertain that the prefix of the element type
is mapped onto a namespace URI, rather than onto the null
namespace – why? Also compare the corresponding attribute
rule – why should they differ?
Any prefix in a QName is required to map to a namespace URI
and not to the null namespace; it's a requirement of the
Namespaces Recommendation. And the treatment of QNames as
element names and attribute names does need to differ in the
sense that unprefixed attribute names invariably are unqualified,
whereas unprefixed element names can have a non-null namespace
URI (the default namespace).
I am told that these arguments do not in fact mean that the
two conditions in queston should be retained. But I'd like the
correction of the rules to be based on correct interpretation
of the namespaces Rec.
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2007 16:06:10 UTC