• To: Bill de hÓra <bill@d...>
• Subject: Re: The subsetting has begun
• From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
• Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 06:11:31 -0500 (EST)
• Cc: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@m...>, Jeff Lowery <Jeff.Lowery@c...>, "Bullard, Claude L \\(Len\\)" <clbullar@i...>, xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <3E5B3C5B.40507@d...> from Bill de hÓraat "Feb 25, 2003 09:50:19 am"

Bill de hÓra scripsit:

> I'm not exagerrating. And what you're saying is irrelevant. XML 
> documents without an xmlms attribute on the root doesn't have a 
> meaningful XML Infoset. I'll stick my neck and say most XML 
> documents are not namespaced.

This is not the case.  A document that doesn't use namespaces at all
certainly does have an infoset.  The only well-formed XML documents
that don't have infosets are ones that use xmlns or xmlns:* attributes
in ways *contrary* to Namespaces in XML.

"Xmlms" for "xmlns" is an interesting slip....

-- 
John Cowan           http://www.ccil.org/~cowan              cowan@c...
To say that Bilbo's breath was taken away is no description at all.  There
are no words left to express his staggerment, since Men changed the language
that they learned of elves in the days when all the world was wonderful.
        --_The Hobbit_

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: The subsetting has begun
    • From: Bill de hÓra <bill@d...>

• References:
  • Re: The subsetting has begun
    • From: Bill de hÓra <bill@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Call for information about XML-Fragments
• Next by Date: Re: Parsing efficiency? - why not 'compile'????
• Previous by thread: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Next by thread: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread