RE: Significant W3C Confusion over Namespace Meaning and Policy

comments inline 
 
-- 
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM
The road to to success is always under construction.   

________________________________

From: Robin Berjon [mailto:robin.berjon@expway.fr]
Sent: Wed 2/16/2005 6:10 AM
To: Dare Obasanjo
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Subject: Re: Significant W3C Confusion over Namespace Meaning and Policy



>
> No, they won't. At least not if you are using MSXML or System.Xml in the
> .NET Framework. The same problem exists with xml:base today. In both
> libraries, the assumption we made was that the XML namespace would be
> unchanging.

Based on what grounds did you decide to make such a bold assumption?

[Dare Obasanjo] That decision was made before my time but given the fact that this thread started because of similar discussions around other specifications I don't think it is as unreasonable as you claim to think that the number of names within a namespace will be unchanging. 


> For this reason, we don't allow users to specify a schema
> for the XML namespace but instead always use an internal schema with a
> fixed list of attribute declarations {xml:lang, xml:space}.

Is there anything in the XML Schema spec that makes this behaviour
conformant?

[Dare Obasanjo] Yes. Schema locations are hints not directives. A XML Schema validator can ignore locations and use schemas it already knows about. 

--
Robin Berjon
   Research Scientist
   Expway, http://expway.com/

Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2005 15:37:25 UTC