• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Looking for an example of a name colliision
• From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
• Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 05:09:11 +0000
• In-reply-to: <20030601031633.GB31614@c...>
• References: <3ED5B096.9080102@t...> <3ED6062E.4080403@b...> <014f01c326ba$5d609890$b6f5d3ce@L565> <3ED860C6.5060207@d...> <001701c3277e$f2b84130$6401a8c0@tbp1> <74thdv4ngtrbjakbft8l1j798veddmnbsv@4...> <m3brxilnhr.fsf@t...> <003f01c327d9$583c5000$6401a8c0@tbp1> <m38ysmr1ev.fsf@t...> <pdnidvsgfau9b2la5cjpf62ftkdot2grkk@4...> <20030601031633.GB31614@c...>

John Cowan <cowan@m...> wrote:
| Arjun Ray scripsit:

|> True.  As far as this idea goes, it's probably "safer" to have the
|> attribute assert "XSLTness" rather than "literalness".
| 
| How is this explicit attribute in each element to be distinguished from
| a convention whereby we insert a *single* attribute into the document
| which says "Any element whose GI begins with the following characters
| has XSLTness?"

One convention doesn't need (or use) colonification (or name munging of
any kind).

• Prev by Date: Re: Looking for an example of a name colliision
• Next by Date: Re: Looking for an example of a name colliision
• Previous by thread: Re: Looking for an example of a name colliision
• Next by thread: Re: Looking for an example of a name colliision
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread