[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: some minor 0.2 corrections

To: Sjoerd Visscher <sjoerd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: some minor 0.2 corrections
From: Tim Bray <tbray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 14:28:53 -0700
Cc: Aaron Swartz <me@xxxxxxxxxxx>, atom-syntax@xxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/>
List-id: <atom-syntax.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-syntax-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
References: <> <>
Sender: owner-atom-syntax@xxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624

Sjoerd Visscher wrote:

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.

Only attributes that can be used on elements in different namespaces should always be qualified. (like rdf:about, ev:event f.e.)

+1

--
Cheers, Tim Bray
        (ongoing fragmented essay: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/)

References:
- some minor 0.2 corrections
  - From: Aaron Swartz
- Re: some minor 0.2 corrections
  - From: Sjoerd Visscher

Prev by Date: RE: some minor 0.2 corrections
Next by Date: Re: some minor 0.2 corrections
Previous by thread: RE: some minor 0.2 corrections
Next by thread: namespace qualifications
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread