Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-general-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 91831 invoked by uid 500); 13 Mar 2003 19:32:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: general@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 91785 invoked from network); 13 Mar 2003 19:32:49 -0000 Subject: Re: Namespaces inherited? To: general@xml.apache.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.7 March 21, 2001 Message-ID: From: neilg@ca.ibm.com Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 14:32:49 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D25ML04/25/M/IBM(Release 5.0.9a |January 7, 2002) at 03/13/2003 02:32:51 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi Tim, A general XML development list would probably be a better place to discuss issues like this than this list--whose primary purpose is to discuss issues common to multiple xml.apache.org projects... Anyway: No, the two examples are certainly not semantically equivalent. It is true that descendant are in the scope of namespace prefixes declared by their ancestors. But the first elemB doesn't actually use the namespace prefix declared in its parent, so it isn't in that namespace; the second does, therefore it is in the same namespace as the parent. Hope that helps, Neil Neil Graham XML Parser Development IBM Toronto Lab Phone: 905-413-3519, T/L 969-3519 E-mail: neilg@ca.ibm.com |---------+---------------------------------> | | "Watts, Tim T" | | | | | | | | | 03/13/2003 02:21 PM | | | Please respond to | | | general | | | | |---------+---------------------------------> >---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: general@xml.apache.org | | cc: | | Subject: Namespaces inherited? | | | | | >---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| Hello, I read that child elements "inherit" the namespace of their parent by default ("Professional Java SOAP", p30, Wrox Press). The W3C spec says that they're in scope for all children. But that's not the same as inheriting. To my understanding, "inheriting" would mean that the children automatically become members of the parent's namespace unless explicitly overridden while "in scope" means that the namespace is merely *available* to the children. According to the book, the following examples are semantically equivalent: I don't think this is correct but I would like to hear from more knowledgable sources. The behavior of the Xerces implementation of DOM does not conform to the above. --------------------------------------------------------------------- In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org