- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: 24 Oct 2001 13:04:19 +0100
- To: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
- Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org, xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com> writes:
> The definition of a QName isn't clear about the interpretation of
> QNames without prefixes.
>
> The definition in part 2 is merely a reference to Namespaces in XML:
<snip/>
> W3C XML Schema, judging by its own usage of QNames as references to
> components, seems to support the default namespace.
>
> Can someone confirm this since this isn't crystal clear in the rec?
This should be clarified in the REC -- the intention is that
unprefixed names are qualified iff there is a default namespace
declaration in scope, i.e. as per element names, not attribute names,
in XML 1.0 plus Namespaces.
The definition should also make clear that the value space includes
pairs of <no known namespace>/None/NULL/..., local name, which
correspond to unprefixed QNames when no default declaration is in
scope.
ht
--
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2001 08:03:32 UTC