It's a bit unlikely that your stylesheet will ever see the inside of a
schema validator, but yes, it's a reasonable objection that it's a bad idea
to use xsi:type as a literal attribute (perhaps there are XML editors that
would get upset by it). But changing it to use xsl:attribute leaves the
intent of the example intact, I think. An alternative would be to use a
namespace alias for "xsi".

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Florent Georges [mailto:darkman_spam@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 05 April 2006 19:02
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE:  QName as attribute value: how to be sure
> the prefix will be bound?
>
> Michael Kay wrote:
>
> > Example: Constructing a QName-Valued Attribute
>
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#creating-attributes
>
>   As simple as that.  I don't find it :-(.  Thanks.
>
>   In this example, a literal attribute is used.  I personnaly used
> xsl:attribute to create it, 'cause when we see the XSLT script as an
> XML document, the 'data' element (in the example you pointed) has an
> @xsi:type saying it is an integer:
>
>     <data xsi:type="xs:integer"
>           xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
>       <xsl:namespace name="xs"
>                      select="'http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema'"/>
>       <xsl:text>42</xsl:text>
>     </data>
>
> but its content is a complex content.  What do you think?
>
>   Thanks for the response.  Regards,
>
> --drkm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> _____________
> Nouveau : tiliphonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger !
> Dicouvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et
> l'international.
> Tilichargez sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com