• To: pjoshi@m... (Praj Joshi)
• Subject: Re: MSXML3SP3 vs illegal characters
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 14:06:17 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson), joshuaa@m... (Joshua Allen), julian.reschke@g... (Julian Reschke), xml-dev@l... (XML DEV), dareo@m... (Dare Obasanjo)
• In-reply-to: <164943583CAE624A868E2EF9A78A7956066F25EA@r...> from "Praj Joshi" at Oct 08, 2002 11:01:30 AM

Praj Joshi scripsit:

> What do you mean by bogus error here?
> 
> According to the namespaces spec
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/#ns-qualnames)
> 
> *********************
> Namespace Constraint: Leading "XML"
> Prefixes beginning with the three-letter sequence x, m, l, in any case
> combination, are reserved for use by XML and XML-related specifications.
> *********************

What that means is that you are not allowed to make up your own prefixes
like "xmlsucks", not that you can't use or declare the standardized
prefix "xml".

-- 
My confusion is rapidly waxing		John Cowan
For XML Schema's too taxing:		jcowan@r...
    I'd use DTDs			http://www.reutershealth.com
    If they had local trees --		http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
I think I best switch to RELAX NG.

• References:
  • RE: MSXML3SP3 vs illegal characters
    • From: "Praj Joshi" <pjoshi@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: heritage (was Re: SGML on the Web)
• Next by Date: RE: MSXML3SP3 vs illegal characters
• Previous by thread: RE: MSXML3SP3 vs illegal characters
• Next by thread: Re: MSXML3SP3 vs illegal characters
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread