W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-names-issues@w3.org > July to September 1998

Re: WD-xml-names-19980916

From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 22:07:47 -0700
Message-Id: <>
To: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>, xml-names-issues@w3.org
Cc: jon.bosak@eng.sun.com, connolly@w3.org
At 02:26 AM 9/15/98 -0400, Murray Maloney wrote:
>With respect to WD-xml-names-19980916

Argh! Where should I be sending this thread?  I dunno, so I've
cc'ed Dan and Jon and they have to work it out.

Murray raises a bunch of points, most of which are self-evidently
true and represent required corrections (editorial/procedural in nature, 
not requiring technial policy decisions I think) to the namespace draft.  
The following, however, raise real issues.

>In Section 6, the statement:
>	The effect of conformance is that in such a document: 
>		[...]
>		No entity names, PI targets, or notation names contain any colons. 
>is an unnecessary contraint on free trade of XML documents.
>It should be possible to conform to this WD without regard
>for naming rules on entities, notations or processing instructions.

The decision to put this in, in the form it currently appears, was
deliberately taken by the former WG.  If we are going to take it out,
we are going to have to raise that in some W3C body.

>In Appendix A, the paragraph:
>"XML 1.0 does not provide a built-in way to declare "global" attributes; 
>Notwithstanding the observation, there is no such thing as a
>global attribute in XML, and thus any reference to them
>should be stricken from this WD.

Same comment.

>In Section A.3, the description of an expanded attribute name
>does not consider the need to know the name of the element
>to which a so-called "global attribute" is attached. We 
>believe that this required information.

Same comment.

>The following is a note that I sent to the XML-Names list.
>It expresses requirements of Veo in XML Namespaces.
>We believe that the namespace specification is incomplete
>unless it addresses the names of entities, notations
>and processing instructions. In addition, our analysis
>of the XML namespace yields a much more rigorous definition
>of the namespace partitions.

Murray raises several issues that are apparently very important to 
Veo, some of which I find somewhat convincing, but which
have been fairly thoroughly hashed over (in my judgement, reasonable
people may disagree) by the former XML WG, and thus would have to
be re-opened for discussion in some other forum, and I don't know
which.  Murray has stated that Veo will have to vote against XML-names
at the AC level; I think I've done my editorial duty in bringing this
situation to the attention to the XML IG/CG chair, the XML W3C
liaison, and the xml-names-issues list.  -Tim
Received on Friday, 18 September 1998 01:07:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:13:38 UTC