Re: Default Namespace should be clearly documented ...

One problem with PI is that there is no encapsulation, so the parser wouldn't
know when to pop the namespace stack.  If PI were expanded to include
any kind of PI encapsulation, then we'd still need some clear syntax
directly to XML 
to support the push of the default namespace, yes?   

That is, can we declare an ENTITY that contains a PI?  That would
allow encapsulation, but I don't think this is supported currently.
My reading of PI is that it is an alternative syntax around ENTITY
and directly to an application.  I don't see how to include PI within an

In any case,  the ENTITY would need to have a pop default namespace stack 
PI at the end or you would need a second PI at the end, which defeats
the purpose of working with the parser.  

Is there a way to do that currently?  I don't think so. Anyone else?

I think we need to look at enhancing PI syntax into the DTD if we
don't want a <EVENT> or other new DTD syntax.

Or am I just rambling here?  

At 02:22 PM 12/1/98 +0100, you wrote:
>why doesn't one just use a processing instruction for this?
>Bryan Cooper wrote:
>> ...
>> In the DTD, I'd like to see this type of syntax:
>> < !EVENT push_new_context_for_namespace_example xnmls="different_ns"
>> TYPE="push"/>
>xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post,
>Archived as:
>To (un)subscribe, the following message;
>(un)subscribe xml-dev
>To subscribe to the digests, the following message;
>subscribe xml-dev-digest
>List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (

F. Bryan Cooper	 		707 823 7324 
VERITAS Software      		707 321 3301 mobile   

Received on Tuesday, 1 December 1998 14:04:46 UTC