> No "null" namespace, just no value. It is defined only by its owner
> element and local name. It's not sharing a "null" namespace with
> unqualified element names.

Ok, noting that this can be turned around to say an no-namespace
element is defined by its local name and attributes, and does not
share a namespace with other elements.

Which I think leaves the position that both the following would be legal:

<media:thing name="here" />

<item name="here" />

...and also that the code doesn't really care if the namespace has no
value or is null, the namespace component of unqualified elements and
attributes (in SAX in Java at least) have the same value (the empty
string).

Cheers,
Danny.


-- 

http://dannyayers.com

Reply via email to