- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: 11 May 2000 10:26:34 +0100
- To: "Curt Arnold" <carnold@houston.rr.com>
- Cc: <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
"Curt Arnold" <carnold@houston.rr.com> writes: > Section 6.2.2: References to schema components across namespaces > The comments in the example are the only place that I have found that > indicate how unqualified QName references are to be resolved. From a > usability standpoint, it would be much preferable to that an unqualified > name be first attempted to be located within the target namespace then with > the datatypes (or schema namespace). This, of course, would be a more > complex resolution than would be used for a unqualified tagname but seems to > be consistent with previous usage. They wouldn't be QNames in the meaning of the word if we did it that way. We didn't think it wise to invent a new concept almost-QName-but-not-exactly. ht -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
Received on Thursday, 11 May 2000 05:26:39 UTC