- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 10:33:19 -0700
- To: Andrew Layman <andrewl@microsoft.com>, "'MURATA Makoto'" <murata@apsdc.ksp.fujixerox.co.jp>, w3c-xml-schema-wg@w3.org
- Cc: richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk, xml-editor@w3.org
At 10:15 AM 6/1/99 -0700, Andrew Layman wrote: >Makoto wrote: "I think that (1) the prefix xml is always implicitly declared >and cannot >be redeclared and (2) the URI 'http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace' >must not be attached to any prefix." > >That is also my memory from the discussions in the namespaces spec design. >It is unfortunately not spelled out in the spec precisely, but we had some >debate over whether other prefixes could be attached to >'http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace', whether parsers were required to >match any prefix attached to 'http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace', etc. >and the answer was "no." Almost. Yes, we had that discussion. Yes, the premise is reasonable. Unfortunately, we failed to reach consensus that it was a good idea to write that into the spec; thus, per the spec, it is perfectly legal to say <z xmlns:evil="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace"> Furthermore, any reasonable implementation of a namespace-aware API and application would probably handle <foo evil:space="preserve"> in the expected way. But the spec doesn't require it. -Tim
Received on Tuesday, 1 June 1999 13:33:03 UTC