Re: are all strings in a sequence valid potential QNam
On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 21:25 -0500, ac wrote: > Hi, > > Complaining may not be so constructive but it may seem that expressing > opinions and viewpoints with logic, experience, and clear sight may be. > The objective should not be determining who is right but rather what is > best for most in the long term. The on-topic part here is that XSLT 2, XQuery and XPath 2 have support (optional) for XML 1.1, and to deal with that you have exactly the same issues as for XML 5th edition in terms of qnames. In addition, there's no way in an XPath expression to enquire about the version of XML in the XML declaration of target documents, so it seems to me the best choice is to allow the widest set, and rely on the XML parser to complain if appropriate. It does have an effect on tokenization, of course, but the XML 1.2 suggestions would have had exactly the same effect if implemented as XML 1.1 and XML 1.0 5e in this regard. It's my full-time job to try & promote interoperability in XML (OK, it's _part_ of my job), and that includes trying to encourage developers to write code that will accept the full range of XML documents... Best, Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org www.advogato.org
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format