RE: Grinding to a halt on Issue 27.

> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
> Robin Berjon
> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 4:10 PM
> To: Julian Reschke
> Cc: WWW-Tag
> Subject: Re: Grinding to a halt on Issue 27.
>
>
>
> Julian Reschke wrote:
> > The requirements for XMLNS are at
> > <http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-xml-names11-req-20020403/> and read:
> >
> > ---
> > Namespaces in XML 1.1 will correspond to XML 1.1.
>
> I18N is an absolute core part of XML. Supporting I18N well requires IRIs.

I don't think this is what this says. IMHO it means: XMLNS 1.1 is the
namespaces spec for XML 1.1 -- that's it. The *requirements* for XML and
XMLNS are separate for very good reasons.

> > The changes required for Namespaces in XML 1.0 processors to  also
process
> > Namespaces in XML 1.1 must be as few and as small as possible.
>
> Most (all?) processors use string comparisons, with no URI normalisation.
> Introducing IRIs doesn't change that.

Yes.

> > I think changing the syntax for namespace names clearly is
> outside the scope
> > of these requirements.
>
> Then read the requirements for XML, it's all there.

No, I'll continue to read the requirements for the XMLNS recommendation,
which starts with the words:

"Namespaces in XML 1.1 is intended to have a single new feature - the
ability to undeclare namespaces. In addition, all [Namespaces in XML 1.0
errata] will be incorporated. The Core Working Group is currently evaluating
potential errata which it expects to publish and include in Namespaces in
XML 1.1."

Obviously this is inconsistent with the addition of IRIs.

Julian


--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760

Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2003 10:26:59 UTC