Title: RE: [rights-examples] ln00x use case discussion
Yup, I agree we should fix it.
(Btw, the acronyms I was referring to are: CR = Change Request, CMP = Change Management Process (the versions recently approved by the RLTC).)
&Thomas.
-----Original Message-----
From: DuCharme, Bob (LNG) [mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 12:26 PM
To: ''
Subject: RE: [rights-examples] ln00x use case discussion
(I attempted to quote the last one as concisely as possible to give context
to my comments without making this too long. ">>" starts my original
questions and ">" Thomas's responses.)
>>xrml2core.xsd declares an element called "xml," but 2.3 of the XML
>>recommendation reserves the use of any names beginning with XML. From
>>an XML 1.0 viewpoint, I suppose you could say that the xrml2core name
>>is actually spelled "r:xml", but it's something to keep in mind.
>i remember checking this before but somehow thought it only applied to
>attribute names (possibly because element default is set to qualified,
>as you point out).
Production 45 of the XML Rec shows that an element type name must be a Name,
and according to section 2.3 of the Rec "Names beginning with the string
"xml", or any string which would match (('X'|'x') ('M'|'m') ('L'|'l')), are
reserved for standardization in this or future versions of this
specification."
>perhaps it makes sense to change the names to be
>more environment-friendly. if i forget, remind me to submit a CR once
>the CMP gets approved. or would you do the honor of the first one?
Sorry, neither of the acronyms ring a bell.
