RE: some minor 0.2 corrections

["Jeremy Gray" <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> It's not a problem for attributes to be unqualified, as long as they are 
> only used on qualified elements, which the atom elements are.

The namespace qualification or lack thereof on attributes has nil to do with
parent element qualification and everything to do with XML-reserved
attribute names and, when those don't apply, the current default namespace.
Should I interpret the above-quoted text as suggesting otherwise?

Jeremy Gray