[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: [good] Question about NS 1.1

• To: "'Joe English'" <jenglish@f...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: [good] Question about NS 1.1
• From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>
• Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 21:47:43 +0100
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <200204092008.g39K80s01648@d...>
• Reply-to: <michael.h.kay@n...>

> Amelia A Lewis wrote:
>
> > Here's a proposal for XML 1.1 + Namespaces 1.1: namespace
> declarations are
> > decreed not to apply to attribute or element content (listen for the
> > screams).  An application that wants something of that sort
> gets to invent
> > its own attributes or elements to create the definitions,
> if it wants to
> > store QNames in element or attribute content.
>
> I'm ambivalent about this.  QNames in content sound like a
> Really Bad Idea on the face of it, but on the other hand
> of all the RECs to come out of the W3C, XSLT is the only
> one in which namespace issues don't cause a tremendous
> headache to end users.  It shifts all the pain onto XSLT
> implementors (thanks, Mike :-).
>
> I'm not sure how this could be accomplished without QNames
> in content.
>
It could have been achieved using an application-level namespace declaration
xsl:ns="some.uri". But it's too late now.

Michael Kay
Software AG
home: Michael.H.Kay@n...
work: Michael.Kay@s...

• References:
  • Re: [good] Question about NS 1.1
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>

• Prev by Date: Problem with cloneNode
• Next by Date: Re: WD for Namespaces 1.1
• Previous by thread: Re: [good] Question about NS 1.1
• Next by thread: Re: [good] Question about NS 1.1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread