Qualified attributes

[Shawn Villaron]

Can someone explain to me why this is worthy of changing?  I get that it's inconsistent, but I'm having trouble understanding what's bad about this ( said another way, how does this impact interoperability )?

-----Original Message-----
From: Jirka Kosek [mailto:jirka at kosek.cz] 
Sent: Sunday, June 07, 2009 2:17 PM
To: MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)
Cc: SC 34 WG4
Subject: Re: Qualified attributes

MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) wrote:

> Will Chezh propose a defect report about this inconsistency?  
> I would welcome it very much.

Sorry for delay, I have just submitted it, it got number DR#08-00141.
This issue should be definitively discussed in Copenhagen. Unfortunately I will not be in Copenhagen, so if you have any comments or questions I would be glad to discuss it here on mailing list, so there is enough input for face-to-face.

>From editorial point of view, I think that this DR and DR 08-0012 (namespace change for Strict) probably should be presented as one changeset, because they will introduce a lot of related changes across text.

				Jirka

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
  Jirka Kosek      e-mail: jirka at kosek.cz      http://xmlguru.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------
       Professional XML consulting and training services
  DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing
------------------------------------------------------------------
 OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 member
------------------------------------------------------------------