- 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