- From: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@comcast.net>
- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 09:39:49 -0500
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
[Jeremy Carroll]
> Jeremy:
> [[[
> I went down this path over the weekend, the results of my musings are on
the
> core list (not yet publicly visible - seems to be a W3C server problem).
> ]]]
>
> Here it is:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Mar/0100.html
>
>
In the referenced post, about 1/3 of the way down, you say
"Whereas the third example (x_3.xml) is:
[[[
<a>
<foo
xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:EG="http://example.org/"/>
</a>
]]]
NOTE Both namespaces are part of the <foo/> element as far as XSLT is
concerned, and the namespace prefixes matter. Thus as far as xslt is
concerned, the xml literals in a_1.xml and a_3.xml are different, even
though both are "<foo/>" surrounded by identical whitespace.
OPINION (uncontroversial?)
=======
I regard these extracts as illustrating "namespace pollution".
I think that the two documents a_1.xml and a_3.xml describe the same RDF
graph despite the difference between them (prefix "eg" replaced by prefix
"EG")."
This is correct except that no "namespace pollution" has occurred, because
the namepsace is NOT the prefix, which plays the role of a temporary alias.
The namespace ***is*** http://example.org/, not "eg" nor "EG". The
namespace Rec is clear on this, and xslt acts accordingly, as does xml
schema.
Of course, anything that assumes that the prefix is fixed, unchanging, and
forever bound to one uri may get into trouble.
Cheers,
Tom P
Received on Monday, 11 March 2002 09:36:15 UTC