Evan Lenz wrote:
>  I'm not sure that it would be very reliably portable. Any processing model
>  that doesn't consider [in-scope namespaces] to be of significance (because
>  it assumes that XML namespaces are for putting element and attribute names
>  in a namespace, how novel) will throw away the prefixes and everything will
>  break.

But that's a bug in the processing model, isn't it? (Maybe I'm missing
something here. What processing model is omitting this?)

>  Let me rephrase the question: Is it too late to require QNames in values to
>  be resolved with an application-level namespace declaration?

Yes.

-- Ron

-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org> , an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> 

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>