B.1.1: Scope of a binding


<fontfamily><param>Lucida Grande</param><bigger>"An element is said to
be within the scope of the binding"


this phrasing is poor. to which binding does "the" refer? the reader
may be expected to understand it to be "the binding of the element'
identifier's prefix to the element's identifier's namespace name", but
that concept is ungrounded at this point in the text.

the least one needs to do is to turn the sentence around, with which
the "the" is more appropriately an "a":


"If an element's identifier's prefix is bound to the same namespace
URI in the [in-scope namespaces] defined in [
<color><param>0000,0000,CCCC</param>XML Information set </color>] as
the namespace URI of the identifier itself, then the element is said
to be within the scope of a binding."


which calls attention to the root of the problem: that the concept
"within the scope of the binding" is at odds with the definition of
"the scope of a binding" as fixed in "namespaces in xml", according to
which the inference flows from the other direction.


the consequence of the draft's inversion is that the it suggests that,
where the apparent binding (after all there _is_ a binding) conflicts
with the contingent binding which would be imputed from the incidental
element identifier, it is necessary to introduce a new binding. this
is not true. one need only change the prefix to reflect the actual
apparent bindings. as a change to the attribute appears to be the
approach suggested when "polishing" attributes, it is why does the
same not apply to the element identifier?


...

</bigger></fontfamily>