- From: David Carlisle <david@dcarlisle.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 10:30:33 +0100 (BST)
- To: abrahams@acm.org
- CC: xml-uri@w3.org
> The problem I see is that if we follow (1), which at this point I more > or less agree with, then there's a nasty inconsistency between the namespace > spec and the definition of expanded names in the XPath spec. Since this whole debate arises because xpath and namespaces are in conflict I assume that one or the other will be changed to match once a final decision is taken. David
Received on Thursday, 1 June 2000 05:45:14 UTC