Re: access the root element

Hi, Kai,

One place to start learning about namespaces is the XSL FAQ. Here's a link
to the FAQ page on namespaces:
http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl/sect2/N5536.html

Here's a link to the top of the FAQ:
http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl/xslfaq.html

Jay Bryant
Bryant Communication Services
(presently consulting at Synergistic Solution Technologies)




"Kai Hackemesser" <kaha@xxxxxx>
11/03/2005 11:12 AM
Please respond to
xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


To
xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc

Subject
Re:  access the root element






Jon,
just one question is still open. If I would add this xmlns entry to my xsl
stylesheet without the 'm' qualifier, would I then be able to access the
"Metrics" element without the m: before? Or is it mandatory to have a
qualified namespace?

Regards,
Kai

> --- Urspr|ngliche Nachricht ---
> Von: Jon Gorman <jonathan.gorman@xxxxxxxxx>
> An: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Betreff: Re:  access the root element
> Datum: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 11:00:47 -0600
>
> On 11/3/05, Kai Hackemesser <kaha@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > Jon,
> >
> > adding the namespace like Roman suuggested did work. But I have'nt
fully
> > understood yet, why.
>
> Well, you might want to google for some information on namespaces if
> you're not sure.  Think of namespaces as a qualifier for an element.
> So to distingish, say a dublin core element with the name "Subject"
> and an element in my own XML application "Subject" I could associate
> each with a namespace.
>
> The xmlns="http://metrics.sourceforge.net/2003/Metrics-First-Flat" is
> putting all the that element and all the descendent elements in that
> doc into that namespace.  XSLT assumes that when you try to match
> something like Metrics, you're look for unquaified elements named
> Metrics.  But what you really want to look for are qualified elements
> named Metrics.  To indicate in the XPATH that the name Metrics is in
> the proper namespace you prefix it with the m, which in the beginning
> of the document is assoicated with that namespace.
>
> Hopefully I haven't made it any more confusing, but that's the
> shortest description I can give.  Using google will more than likely
> turn up much better descriptions.  (Or you could go to www.w3.org and
> read the specs.)
>
> Jon Gorman