Hmm, "" as an URI fragment would come out to be what? A same-document
reference? I guess what is being said then with an empty namespace is =
that
the namespace of the document is the document itself. The meaning of the
resource is contained within the resource, a hermetic namespace. 

Despite Hermeticism being deprecated I still find it a useful, or at =
least
interesting, concept.  

Cheers,
Bryan Rasmussen

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: Jeff Rafter [mailto:lists@j...]
Sendt: 3. april 2006 20:12
Til: Bryan Rasmussen
Cc: Michael Kay; xmlschema-dev@w...
Emne: Re: SV: no targetNamespace, elementFormDefault qualified


I think that (at least according to the NS rec) it is a real URI, but it =

is explicitly disallowed. What I mean by disallowed I don't know-- I 
don't remember if it is a conformance requirement or not.

errata NE09 http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-names-19990114-errata#NE09

Cheers,
Jeff Rafter

Bryan Rasmussen wrote:
> Well, it's also problematic because as an empty string it's not a real =
URI
is
> it, not even a relative URI. Oh well, it's not my schema, so I =
probably
> shouldn't worry. :)
> 
> Cheers,
> Bryan Rasmussen
> 
> -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
> Fra: Michael Kay [mailto:mike@s...]
> Sendt: 3. april 2006 14:35
> Til: Bryan Rasmussen; xmlschema-dev@w...
> Emne: RE: no targetNamespace, elementFormDefault qualified
> 
> 
> 
>>Should there be an
>>xmlns:blank="" perhaps to actively qualify the non-namespace =
qualified
>>elements? 
> 
> 
> I've always thought it should be possible to assign a prefix to the
> non-namespace, but XML 1.1 instead decided to use the above syntax for =
a
> "namespace undeclaration": it causes the prefix "blank" to go out of =
scope
> entirely, so it can't be used for anything.
> 
> Michael Kay
> http://www.saxonica.com/
> 
> 
> 
> 

From meiry@f... Tue Apr 04 12:38:12 2006
Received: from wiggum.w3.org ([128.30.52.23])
	by frink.w3.o