• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: [good] Question about NS 1.1
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: 09 Apr 2002 11:07:53 -0400
• In-reply-to: <3CB3027B.370F503C@s...>
• References: <NCBBKFMJCLIMOBIGKFMJMEPMHHAA.ldodds@i...> <3CB3027B.370F503C@s...>

On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 11:02, james anderson wrote:
> 
> the infoset is not itself the problem. the problem begins where one
> expects or specifies that the set of "in-scope" namespaces be available
> as a static value.
> 
> i'm curious how that came to pass.

I _think_ it's because of QNames in attribute/element values, but it may
also have to do with canonicalization discussions.  I seem to remember
it being an issue for the long-ago XML Fragment discussions, but I'm not
sure.
 
-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [good] Question about NS 1.1
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>
  • RE: [good] Question about NS 1.1
    • From: "Leigh Dodds" <ldodds@i...>

• References:
  • Naive Question about NS 1.1
    • From: "Leigh Dodds" <ldodds@i...>
  • Re: [good] Question about NS 1.1
    • From: james anderson <james.anderson@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: [good] Question about NS 1.1
• Next by Date: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Previous by thread: Re: [good] Question about NS 1.1
• Next by thread: RE: [good] Question about NS 1.1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread