RE: Excluding prefix on p:inline (was Re: XProc Minutes 31 Jan 2008) from Grosso, Paul on 2008-02-05 (public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org from February 2008)

From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:43:34 -0500
To: <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CF83BAA719FD2C439D25CBB1C9D1D3020A5067FC@HQ-MAIL4.ptcnet.ptc.com>

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-xml-processing-model-wg-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-xml-processing-model-wg-request@w3.org] On 
> Behalf Of Norman Walsh
> Sent: Tuesday, 2008 February 05 9:39
> To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Excluding prefix on p:inline (was Re: XProc Minutes 
> 31 Jan 2008)
> 
> / Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> was heard to say:
> | Although we could punt to extension steps that others write,
> | namespaces cause such problems generally, I think we should make
> | namespace handling as straight-forward as possible.
> 
> Could we punt to XML 1.1? You can just undeclare them in XML 1.1.

Do you mean Namespaces 1.1?

paul

Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2008 15:47:32 UTC