- From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
- Date: 14 Mar 2002 11:27:05 -0500
- To: Stuart Celarier <stuart@ferncrk.com>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
On Wed, 2002-03-13 at 21:22, Stuart Celarier wrote: > However, it is being suggested that the DTD (which is inherently not > namespace aware) should contain namespace declarations, as if they were > attributes. But namespace declarations are not attributes. Because SVG > 1.0 states that it conforms to Namespaces in XML, why should it be > necessary to notate which elements may or must contain with namespace > declarations in order to be valid? > > Conformance with Namespaces in XML seems to mean that one can add > whatever namespace declarations one fancies to any element at all > without effecting the validity of the document (so long as they don't > interfere with other namespace declarations). That's not what section 2 of Namespaces in XML suggests: ----------------------- A namespace is declared using a family of reserved attributes. Such an attribute's name must either be xmlns or have xmlns: as a prefix. These attributes, like any other XML attributes, may be provided directly or by default. (http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/#ns-decl) ----------------------- Namespace declarations are clearly defined as attributes, if odd ones. > Let's look forward to that bright day when DTDs are deprecated, and we > don't have to think so hard how to make them do things they never were > never intended to. I suspect the jury will be out on that for while. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com
Received on Thursday, 14 March 2002 10:22:19 UTC