• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Re: Non-infoset
• From: richard@i... (Richard Tobin)
• Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 15:26:30 +0100 (BST)
• Cc:
• In-reply-to: <425A7845.8090106@m...>
• Organization: HCRC, University of Edinburgh

In article <425A7845.8090106@m...> you write:
>There are also well-formed and even namespace 
>well-formed XML documents that do not have infosets. Off the top of my 
>head, I *think* that all namespace well-formed XML documents that only 
>use absolute namespace URIs have well-defined infosets.

That's certainly supposed to be the case.

The reason that documents with relative namespace URIs don't have
infosets is that they were deprecated following a W3C XML plenary
ballot, which resolved that future specifications would define no
interpretation for them.  (http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xppa)

-- Richard

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Re: Non-infoset
    • From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>

• References:
  • Re: Re: Non-infoset
    • From: Elliotte Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Re: Non-infoset
• Next by Date: RE: Re: Non-infoset
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: Non-infoset
• Next by thread: RE: Re: Non-infoset
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread