[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Namespace declaration ISSUE
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.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]