- From: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
- Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 16:43:03 +0100
- To: Paul Mitchell <paul@paul-mitchell.me.uk>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <43FF2987.5040303@students.cs.uu.nl>
Paul Mitchell schreef: > What do you mean by "the" XML namespace? I did propose injecting <style> > and <script> into it, but that is only part of my evil master-plan to > have XHTML declared "the" XML namespace, if not "of default" then at > least "of last resort". I'm sure you must mean something else, because > no-one likes my plan. :) All elements and attributes starting with ‘xml’ are reserved for generic XML constructs (consequently, you can’t or at least shouldn’t create an element called e.g. <XmlData>). XML Namespaces, which itself uses xmlns:-prefixed attributes that are also in the XML namespace, defines this further that all elements starting with xml: have a fixed namespace which does not have to be declared explicitly. Thus, the ‘xml:’ prefix is referred to as ‘the XML namespace’. Adding attributes to that has the advantage that it applies to all XML documents, is part of the base standard, and that the namespace doesn’t have to be declared. Examples are the ‘xml:lang’, ‘xml:base’, ‘xml:id’ and ‘xmlns’ attributes. However, for something to be added to the XML namespace, it must be very generic and apply to almost all or at least a lot of documents. Like, most document types have IDs, most XML files are language-dependant, and all documents can be given a different base URI. ~Grauw -- Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san nan da!!
Received on Friday, 24 February 2006 15:43:09 UTC