- From: Vun Kannon, David <dvunkannon@kpmg.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 12:27:34 -0500
- To: "'www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org'" <www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org>
How should the xmlns() scheme be used to specify the default namespace? XBRL taxonomy linkbases contain XLink extended links. These linkbases may contain thousands of locators whose xlink:href attributes point to specific elements in specific namespaces. My reading of the XPointer drafts is that they would require the repetition of the xmlns() scheme part in every href in the file. I think it is unfortunate that the XPointer drafts are XML Namespace and XML Schema aware enough to see a problem, but not aware enough to reuse the devices of those specifications, choosing instead to reinvent them. Namespace prefix resolution is well handled through the xmlns: attributes. All XPointer has to do to leverage this work is to state that the semantics of a QName in XPointer content be resolved using these mechanisms, exactly as element and attribute names are. This proposal would eliminate the need to restate the xmlns mapping in every XPointer, which will bloat many forms of namespace aware documents. It would also make my first question easy to answer. Cheers, David vun Kannon Chair, XBRL Specification Working Group ***************************************************************************** The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. When addressed to our clients any opinions or advice contained in this email are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing KPMG client engagement letter. *****************************************************************************
Received on Monday, 19 August 2002 13:27:51 UTC