- From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
- Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 10:39:40 -0400
- To: xml-uri@w3.org
At 07:23 PM 5/20/00 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote: > "The namespace URI specified in the XML document can be a URI > reference as defined in [RFC2396]; this means it can have a > fragment identifier and can be relative. A relative URI should > be resolved into an absolute URI during namespace processing: > the namespace URIs of expanded-names of nodes in the data model > should be absolute. Two expanded-names are equal if they have the > same local part, and either both have a null namespace URI or > both have non-null namespace URIs that are equal." > > -- http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xpath-19991116#dt-expanded-name > >I think everybody agrees it's unfortunate that these two W3C >Recommendations >are inconsistent. > >The disagreement is on which one should be treated as a mistake >to be fixed, and which one is to be recommended. Treat XPath as a layer on top of XML 1.0 and Namespaces in XML, and this is just application-specific behavior (in XPath) that expands on the possibilities in XML and Namespaces. Alternatively, we can keep going round-and-round on this. Simon St.Laurent XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed. Building XML Applications Inside XML DTDs: Scientific and Technical Cookies / Sharing Bandwidth http://www.simonstl.com
Received on Sunday, 21 May 2000 10:37:27 UTC