- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: 07 May 2001 21:12:02 +0100
- To: Grégoire Pau <gpau@acland.fr>
- Cc: "Martin Gudgin" <marting@develop.com>, <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Grégoire Pau <gpau@acland.fr> writes:
> But, in the elementFormDefault=unqualified mode, I thought that
> the namespace was inherited from its father tag. Ex. in the following
> example:
>
> <t1:a>
> <b/>
> <c>
> ...
> </c>
> </t1:a>
>
> b and c are belonging to the t1 associated namespace ?
Only indirectly. Think of attributes: in <t1:a b='3'/> the 'b'
attribute is indirectly in, or associated with, the namespace of 'a',
but is not explicitly qualified with it -- similarly for the <b> and
<c> elements above.
> Therefore, there is no way to determine the namespace of an
> element without the schema when using the unqualified form.
> Is that correct ?
Essentially, yes, that's correct. If you care about making
affiliation transparent, use the qualified mode in your schemas.
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 Monday, 7 May 2001 16:12:13 UTC