On 27 Jan 2009, at 17:09, Stephane Corlosquet wrote:
So far I understand that the xsd and xsi namespaces should be
defined as
follows:
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";
Indeed.
How about the following elements using expand
Hi,
So far I understand that the xsd and xsi namespaces should be defined as
follows:
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";
However I can find some places on w3.org where the # version is defined,
like on the SPARQL language specific
Wow - I had forgotten that was hardcoded in the qname module. There is
NO reason for that as far as I know. We could probably safely remove it
but I would need to spend some time analyzing first. Is there any value
in removing it?
Toby Inkster wrote:
"xmlns:xsi" is one such namespace. I
> If the W3C validator returns an error when the xsi XML namespace is not
> well defined, then I would expect the same for the xsd XML namespace.
> However both
> xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
> xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#";
> validate in XHTML+RDFa.
The W3C valid
Hi,
Thanks Christophe, Shane and Toby for your informative answers.
> Hmm, I hope it's not getting to philosophical now ;-) I'm sure it's
> no longer
> related to Stéphane's original question
It is still related! More questions now. I assume that the xsd prefix
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema f
Christoph Lange wrote:
Hmm, I hope it's not getting to philosophical now ;-) I'm sure
it's no longer
related to Stéphane's original question, but nevertheless let me
ask: Wouldn't
it, in some cases, be reasonable to make XML namespace URIs usable as
vocabulary URIs? What URI would, e.g.,
On Saturday 24 January 2009 23:51:47 Toby A Inkster wrote:
> In general XML terms, a namespace plus local name do not "expand" to
> anything - they are simply a pair. The idea of expanding them is RDF-
> specific. This is why there are a number of namespace URIs that do
> not end in a hash or slash
On Saturday 24 January 2009 23:52:00 Shane McCarron wrote:
> Because the are *namespace* URIs, not *vocabulary* URIs. They were
> never intended to be expanded by concatenating the expanded prefix with
> the value after the colon.
Hmm, I hope it's not getting to philosophical now ;-) I'm sure it
Because the are *namespace* URIs, not *vocabulary* URIs. They were
never intended to be expanded by concatenating the expanded prefix with
the value after the colon. QNames are never concatenated - they are
treated as a tuple. CURIEs are ALWAYS concatenated, but CURIE prefixes
associate a
On Thursday 22 January 2009 12:59:08 Shane McCarron wrote:
> It basically has to do with dereferencing the resulting URI when you use
> a QName or CURIE (e.g., xsi:lala should dereference to
> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance#lala - basically it has to do
> with how the resource at the end
It basically has to do with dereferencing the resulting URI when you use
a QName or CURIE (e.g., xsi:lala should dereference to
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance#lala - basically it has to do
with how the resource at the end of the namespace URI is constructed,
and how its components
Hi Stéphane,
On Thursday 22 January 2009 12:42:07 Stephane Corlosquet wrote:
> Line 3, Column 55: value of fixed attribute "xmlns:xsi" not equal to
> default.
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance#";
>
> while xmlns:xsd does not produce such an error.
>
> Removing the # in the e
12 matches
Mail list logo
