• From: Adam M Donahue <amd0978@a...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:32:35 -0500 (EST)

In the XML Namespaces specification, section 5.2:

	If the URI reference in a default namespace declaration is empty,
	then unprefixed elements in the scope of the declaration are not
	considered to be in any namespace.

Then, a few lines below:

	The default namespace can be set to the empty string.  This has
	the same effect, within the scope of the declaration, of there
	being no default namespace.

Is not the second sentence redundant?  I know this is a trivial point, but
I'm used to specs being concise without much repeating information.  I'm
wondering if I'm missing some point of difference between these two
sentences.

Adam


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Prev by Date: namespace question
• Next by Date: Re: What is XML for?
• Previous by thread: CML and the MML of XML
• Next by thread: Re: Namespaces doc.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread