• From: David Megginson <david@m...>
• To: XML-Dev Mailing list <xml-dev@i...>, www-html@w...
• Date: 17 Jan 2000 14:03:44 -0500

"Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...> writes:

> If so, is:
> 
>                       This is also available <xhtml:a
> xhtml:href="http://www.w3.org/">online</xhtml:a>.
> 
> equivalent to:
> 
>                       This is also available <xhtml:a
> href="http://www.w3.org/">online</xhtml:a>.
> 
> While XHTML seems to assume that attributes with no prefix fall into
> the namespace of their containing element throughout, I can't find
> this stated explicitly.  (Perhaps they weren't aware that this has
> been a contentious issue?)

Yes, it would have been better if RDF and XHTML had included explicit
statements to this effect, though I have yet to see a spec that does
things the other way.  It's not too late for XHTML -- try submitting a 
formal comment to the WG before it goes to REC.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson                 david@m...
           http://www.megginson.com/

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/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.

• References:
  • tricky XHTML 1.0 namespace question
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Costs of the W3C
• Next by Date: RE: Microsoft's responce to XML.com article
• Previous by thread: Re: tricky XHTML 1.0 namespace question
• Next by thread: unsunscribe
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread