Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
David Carlisle a écrit :
>> Surely. We can find cases when one is better that the other. Naming
>> elements has the advantage that in many cases we can identify the
>> element in fault at a glance.
>
> yes, for humans names (including prefixes) are usually better.
> In a schematron context though there's no standard way of expressing the
> required namespace bindings to a following process, so (for machine use)
> it's simpler to use the prefix free form which you can just expose as
> a string for some later Xpath parser to pick up.
>
> In a system where you have full control of the pipeling mechanisms, the
> tradefoffs may well be different...
In fact, I did it for both usages : it's human readable AND it can be
added in an XML report to be processed automatically
In this last case, if I append my canonical path to an element (as text
context or as an attribute), the relevant namespace declarations will be
added if necessary
--
Cordialement,
///
(. .)
--------ooO--(_)--Ooo--------
| Philippe Poulard |
-----------------------------
http://reflex.gforge.inria.fr/
Have the RefleX !
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
