- From: Richards, Frank (RTIS) <frank.richards@reedtech.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 08:40:29 -0400
- To: "'James Clark'" <jjc@jclark.com>, "Richards, Lisa (RTIS)" <lisa.richards@reedtech.com>
- Cc: "'xml-names-issues@w3.org'" <xml-names-issues@w3.org>, "Richards, Frank (RTIS)" <frank.richards@reedtech.com>, "'abrahams@acm.org'" <abrahams@acm.org>
The objection does indeed pertain to namespace awareness: Even though an xml 1.0 parser will accept <edi:address> and <publish:address> as perfectly acceptable element names, it will not be able to resolve the references to say /dtds/edi.ent and /dtds/publish.ent, and if it could, it couldn't deal with the actual declarations being <!ELEMENT address, in both cases. We don't see how an xml 1.0 parser can do this without being modified, and thus becoming an xml 1.0' parser. Frank Richards > -----Original Message----- > From: James Clark [SMTP:jjc@jclark.com] > Sent: Friday, August 21, 1998 7:11 PM > To: Richards, Lisa (RTIS) > Cc: 'xml-names-issues@w3.org'; Richards, Frank (RTIS); > 'abrahams@acm.org' > Subject: Re: xml-namespaces > > Richards, Lisa (RTIS) wrote: > > > It appears that a document containing qualified names is unlikely to be > > valid in terms of the unmodified 1.0 spec, so the namespace spec must > > provide its own interpretation of any such document. > > This is not correct. XML namespaces do not change what valid means. > "Valid" continues to mean exactly what it means in XML 1.0. As far as > DTD processing is concerned a colon has no special meaning. > > Future work on schemas will provide namespace awareness. > > James >
Received on Monday, 24 August 1998 08:44:46 UTC