On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 09:51 +0100, Pete Cordell wrote:
> As I understand it, <foo:bar/> is an XML well-formed document, but is not an
> XML Namespace well-formed document.
Right.
[...]
> So rather than doing:
>
> <com.foo:bar/>
>
> I would suggest doing:
>
> <:com.foo:bar/>
> This is XML well-formed, but the initial colon means that it is not XML
> namespace well-formed. You could claim that it was XML namespace-bis
> well-formed though.
Note that if you start using names like com.foo, you lose the use case
of copying HTML fragments from (say) RSS/Atom into HTML, where typically
you want the same local-name to be copied, but the namespaces are
actually (strictly speaking) different.
I don't have a way to measure the relative frequencies of the various
use cases, though.
Liam
--
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
