- From: Martin Gudgin <marting@develop.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 22:14:57 +0100
- To: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>, "Asir S Vedamuthu" <asirv@webmethods.com>, "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
- Cc: "Allen Brown" <allenbr@microsoft.com>
----- Original Message ----- From: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com> To: "Asir S Vedamuthu" <asirv@webmethods.com>; "Gudgin, Martin" <marting@develop.com>; "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org> Cc: "Allen Brown" <allenbr@microsoft.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 7:02 PM Subject: RE: Positions on issue 19 Note that "no namespace" doesn't mean "the global null namespace". That is, if I have unqualified "foo" in one context and unqualified "foo" in another context then I can say nothing about how the two relate regardless of them having the same unqualified name. Henrik [MJG] OK, now i'm confused. What's the 'global null namespace'? And how does it differ from 'no namespace'? Surely unqualified is unqualified. No more need be said... Gudge
Received on Tuesday, 29 May 2001 17:16:35 UTC