Re: the problem with include and import

> In my opinion, named constructs not declared to be in any XML 
> namespace,

Essentially there are no such things in the Xpath view of the world
things in the no namespace are not considered to be some floating thing
that can be captured into other namespaces, they are just as fixed as
anything else in a namespace which just happens to have an empty name
but behaves in all respects just like a namespace with a non empty name.

>  With that in mind, I say that overriding should be possible, 
> but there should also be a mechanism for avoiding it.

use xsl:include instead of import.


> Anyhow, there appears to be little interest in this thread.  I guess 
> robustness & scalability aren't high priorities for the WG or other users on 
> the list.   Alternatively, perhaps I'm just making a very poor case for the 
> vulnerabilities and limitations of the include/import mechanism,

the latter:-)

> rather than allowing namespaces per-stylesheet instance.

I don't think you've defined what namespace-per instance means.
A given construct has a name which consists of a pair of strings.
Saying the namespace should change at the instance level is just the
same as saying you should be able to change the first letter of
variables on instances.

David



_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.

 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list