RE: [xml-dev] RelaxNG question

From
Dare Obasanjo <>
To
Bill de hÓra <>
Date
2003-08-18T22:21:08Z
ID
<>
Thread
RE: [xml-dev] RelaxNG question
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill de hÓra [mailto:] 
> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 3:13 PM
> To: Dare Obasanjo
> Cc: Tim Bray; XML Dev
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] RelaxNG question
> 
> 
> > 
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1/#soapbody
> 
> I read the section and saw nothing that required the negation 
> of non-namespaced names. Unless you're looking to 
> overconstrain SOAP, perhaps you can explain your thinking, or 
> get back on topic.

"All child element information items of the SOAP Body element information item:

SHOULD have a [namespace name] property which has a value, that is the name of the element SHOULD be namespace qualified." 

Of course, nothing stops you from being pedantic and arguing that a SHOULD is not a requirement. There is also http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20030123/#section-attribute-node which may require banning attributes without a namespace name. 

Anyway the point is that there are XML vocabularies that have this characteristic which unfortunately cannot be described by any of the popular XML schema languages. 

-- 
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM 
People can be divided into two types: those who still possess a fierce hunting instinct and those who pay to park.                                                       

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.