Re: RDFa reliance on namespace declaration

On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 12:08:46 +0200, Ian Davis <iand@internetalchemy.org>  
wrote:

> This is missing the original point of this thread. It's not the  
> namespace nodes that I'm interested in, but the specific prefixes that  
> are used in the resulting XML serialization and their binding to the  
> CURIEs/qnames in attribute values.

What you seem to be saying is that if you hack a document up textually it  
may mean something different if you don't keep the namespace prefixes the  
same. True, but this is nothing new. If you hack an xml:base attribute  
out, all the hrefs will have a different meaning. If you take an xml:lang  
out, all the text will have a different meaning.

In fact that is what the XML canonicalization rec is all about, trying to  
keep the context intact. It says quite explicitly:

"4.4 No Namespace Prefix Rewriting
[...]
However, there now exist a number of contexts in which namespace prefixes  
can impart information value in an XML document. For example, an XPath  
expression in an attribute value or element content can reference a  
namespace prefix. Thus, rewriting the namespace prefixes would damage such  
a document by changing its meaning (and it cannot be logically equivalent  
if its meaning has changed).
[...]
Moreover, it is possible to prove that namespace rewriting is harmful,  
rather than simply ineffective.
[...]"

http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-c14n#NoNSPrefixRewriting

Steven Pemberton

Received on Tuesday, 27 June 2006 12:36:11 UTC