• From: "Clark C. Evans" <cce@c...>
• To: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 14:53:37 -0400 (EDT)

On Fri, 19 May 2000, John Cowan wrote:
> That is correct as stated, but it reflects a misconception.  Namespaces
> provide nothing but a superficial mapping of GIs and attribute names into
> so-called "universal names", which are simply an ordered pair of the
> form {string, Name} where "string" has the syntax of a URI.  The SGML/XML
> semantic model is unchanged.

Just for reference.. (please correct me if I'm wrong)

The { string, Name } model of namespaces is what 
XPath specification uses.  The namespace spec uses
a 4-tuple { type, string, parent-local, local }
where type is "element" or "global-attribute" 
or "per-element-attribute" and where parent-local
is null except for the "per-element-attribute",
in which case, it is the parent element's local.

Clark


***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@x...&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XLink a special case in the self-describing Web?
    • From: "David Brownell" <david-b@p...>
  • Re: XLink a special case in the self-describing Web?
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• References:
  • Re: XLink a special case in the self-describing Web?
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Ambiguity in XML spec
• Next by Date: Re: XLink a special case in the self-describing Web?
• Previous by thread: Re: XLink a special case in the self-describing Web?
• Next by thread: Re: XLink a special case in the self-describing Web?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread