[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
keshlam@u... wrote: > I think I'm going to drop out of this thread again, as it's rehashing > ground that has been VERY thoroughly covered in the past... Which doesn't imply that consensus was reached. > Namespaces are NAME spaces. That's all. Folks read all sorts of other > implications into namespaces, and everyone has their own ideas about what > they want to do with namespaces, but namespaces themselves (a) are just > naming and (b) make no particular effort to be compatable with DTD > validation. There was a fairly explicit assumption that if you were using > Namespaces, you would either work with well-formed documents or with a > namespace-aware schema language, _NOT_ with DTDs. Can one find that "fairly explicit assumption" in any W3C document? If so, which one, and precisely where? Paul Abrahams
|

Cart



