> At 02:32 PM 11/5/98 -0800, Steve Harris wrote:
> >Reading the Namespaces specification, I've found contradictory examples
> >of namespace defaulting. Any input in determining the proper
> >interpretation would be greatly appreciated.
> > The first example is as follows:
> ><?xml version="1.0"?>
> > <x xmlns:edi='http://ecommerce.org/schema'>
> > <!-- the edi namespace applies to the "x" element and contents -->
> ></x>
>
> Good catch. This comment is erroneous - the namespace only applies
> to things that are prefixed "edi", which the "x" element clearly
> isn't.
I think the comment is correct as it stands, though I agree it could
be clearer. Element isn't element tag/GI.
-- 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)