It is not clear why v2: has been added to the element name in both these cases.
Revise the text to address this comment
10.2 [10 & 22]
te
Proposed Disposition of DIS 29500 Comment GB-0617 (Modified: 2007-12-05) Agreed that this is confusing; the following clarifications have been added to Part 5, §10.2, page 25, lines 315 to the note: [Note: The statements above introduce a potential ambiguity in defining the correct behavior of a markup consumer performing subsumption. To illustrate, take the example where a version 2 of a markup specification subsumes all the elements and attributes in a version 1 markup specification. Further a A ssume that the namespace associated with prefix v2 subsumes the namespace associated with v1. Suppose a markup consumer that understands the v2 namespace encounters markup of the following form: <v1:OldElement mc:Ignorable=”v2″ v2:NewAttribute=”value” /> How should that markup consumer interpret that markup? Once it has been processed to remove the markup compatibility Ignorable attribute and perform the subsumption, Should should it be considered equivalent to the following markup? <v2:OldElement NewAttribute=”value” /> Or should it be considered equivalent to the following markup? <v2:OldElement v2:NewAttribute=”value” /> Note that during subsumption, v1:OldElement is replaced, or subsumed, by v2:OldElement. According to “Namespaces in XML 1.0 (Second Edition)”, these two potential pieces of markup are not equivalent. Additionally, the XML Schema specification allows for the construction of different XSD schemas that validate one, the other, or both of these constructs. end note]
