RE: [RSS-DEV] DW's RSS 2.0 is (possibly) RDF Compatible [was: Dave Winer's RSS 2.0]
> Feel free to run it through the RDF validator : it gives a "warning"Yes there is, an unqualified attribute is not the same as an attribute
> about unqualified attributes, but that decision was only made based upon
> non-qualified attributes on RDF elements where no default namespace is
> given; there's no rationale for it where a default namespace is given.
qualified by prefix to the same namespace name as the default namespace.
Such an attribute is in a symbolspace defined by the element it is in.
<q cite="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/#defaulting">Note that default
namespaces do not apply directly to attributes.</q>
Hence it is incorrect to have an unqualified attribute, the parsers practice
of assuming the default namespace is the one to use is a kludge in the event
of an obvious error.
Your use of daml:collection is interesting, perhaps the solution to the
confusion <rdf:Seq> seems to induce lies there? Would daml:collection
satisfy the pro- and anti-RDF camps in RSS1.0?
Using the term "symbolspace" to mean something more like the way
"namespace" is normally defined in contexts other than XML.