- From: Elliotte Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 07:36:05 -0700
- To: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "public-xhtml2@w3.org" <public-xhtml2@w3.org>, "wai-xtech@w3.org" <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Robert J Burns wrote: > You also mention the null namespace in this email in the context of > helping authors. The proliferation of the null namespace is — in my view > — a misinterpretation of the namespaces recommendation that already > causes some of the same headaches you describe in your critique of TAG. I tend to agree that it was a bad design decision, and causes lots of headaches. However it's in no way a misinterpretation. Unprefixed attributes are never in any namespace. Full stop. This is what the spec says, for good or bad. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu Java I/O 2nd Edition Just Published! http://www.cafeaulait.org/books/javaio2/ http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596527500/ref=nosim/cafeaulaitA/
Received on Friday, 30 May 2008 14:36:43 UTC