Namespace declaration ISSUE

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

I would like this on the agenda of the next telecon.  And would 
namespace-knowledgeable people please comment in advance?

[1] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/cgmo-webcgm/200508/msg00010.html

Basically, as I explained in [1], I think what we had in the spec preceding 
the current CD2 text was broken.  While it required definition of 
application namespaces, it also allowed the WebCGM namespace to be 
undefined, which I believe violates "XML Namespaces".

So I tossed in something to make it legal in the CD2 text -- every XCF 
instance MUST define the WebCGM namespace (which makes all of our test 
cases illegal).

As I explained in [1], this is one of two options I see for a 
solution.  The other would effectively default the WebCGM namespace, but 
with a side effect that I describe in [1] (this solution apparently matches 
what SVG1.1 does).

So ...

a.) Is my analysis correct in [1]?
b.) Which option do you prefer?

-Lofton.