• From: "Fuchs, Matthew" <matthew.fuchs@c...>
• To: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:48:42 -0700

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@t...]
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 2:23 PM
> To: xml-dev@l...
> Subject: RE: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
> 
> 
> At 12:59 PM 24/08/01 -0700, Fuchs, Matthew wrote:
> > In the meantime, in order to do the least
> >harm to future solutions, I advocate completely excising 
> local elements from
> >the namespace mechanism by applying Andrew Layman's Wittgensteinian
> >interpretation of unqualified as meaning out of the scope of 
> the namespace
> >rec. entirely.  
> 
> If by "unqualified" you mean "unprefixed, and with no default
> namespace in effect" then Andrew's interpretation is the only
> one that is consistent with a sane reading of the namespace rec.
> [And this seems to be the position adopted by XSD; does 
> anyone disagree?]  -Tim
> 

Yes, that's precisely what I mean.  However, "consistent" and "sane" were
not often a characteristic of readings of the namespace rec I've been privy
to. :-)

Matthew

• Prev by Date: RE: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
• Next by Date: RE: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
• Previous by thread: Re: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
• Next by thread: RE: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread