- From: Martin Gudgin <marting@develop.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 08:18:17 +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: "Martin Gudgin" <marting@develop.com>; "Asir S Vedamuthu" <asirv@webmethods.com>; "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org> Cc: "Allen Brown" <allenbr@microsoft.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 12:06 AM Subject: RE: Positions on issue 19 >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... It was in reference to your comment about existing APIs. What I wanted to make clear is that even though "" migth seem to match "" then the (false) conclusion should not be drawn that two unqualified elements with no namespace "matches" in the sense that they can be known to be the same elements. [MJG] OK, I now understand the point. To be honest though I think the same applies to qualified elements in certain cases. Context is everything! Gudge
Received on Wednesday, 30 May 2001 04:50:10 UTC