Re: Namespaces (and validation)

John Cowan (cowan@locke.ccil.org)
Thu, 06 Aug 1998 16:07:55 -0400


james anderson wrote:

> if the 19980802 spec were refined to include the requisite mechanism for
> binding prefixes outside of the root element along with the anscilliary
> scoping rules, then this should be possible.

Doubtless, but it doesn't and that's that. In the DTD, prefixes
are without meaning.

> the implicit pi binding mechanism and dynamic scope rule of the earlier draft
> were, in any event, sufficient.

So they were. "Dynamic" scope? More like global scope.

Et iterum censeo, local ns definition (as opposed to local
ns *defaulting*, which I applaud) delenda est.

-- 
John Cowan	http://www.ccil.org/~cowan		cowan@ccil.org
	You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
	You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
		Clear all so!  'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)