• From: Thufir <hawat.thufir@g...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 02:13:56 +0000 (UTC)

David Carlisle <davidc <at> nag.co.uk> writes:
[...]
> Formally it's well formed but not namespace well formed (a term 
> introduced by the namespaces rec). It may or may not be valid (depending 
> on the dtd).  If your parser is namespace aware it's likely to be 
> rejected with a fatal error as it''s not namespace well formed.
> 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/#dt-nwf
[...]


thanks for answering those questions, it's much easier to proceed :)  Kinda
niggling questions, but helpful.  


thanks,

Thufir

• References:
  • smorgasbord of simple questions (well, three)
    • From: Thufir <hawat.thufir@g...>
  • Re: smorgasbord of simple questions (well, three)
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>