W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > August 2007

Re: QName as a defined term

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 10:28:29 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2k5requsy.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> was heard to say:
| Norman Walsh wrote:
|> Henry suggested that we need a defined term for QName because we
|> sometimes define namespaces in a non-standard way. I constructed the
|> following:
|>
|> <para><termdef xml:id="dt-QName">In the context of XProc, a
|> <firstterm>QName</firstterm> is almost always a QName in the
|> <biblioref linkend="xmlns10"/> (or <biblioref linkend="xmlns11"/>,
|> as
|> appropriate) sense. Note, however, that <tag>p:option</tag> and
|> <tag>p:parameter</tag> values can get their namespace declarations in
|> a non-standard way (with <tag>p:parameters</tag>).</termdef>
|> </para>
|
| Presumably the "(with <tag>p:parameters</tag>)" at the end there
| actually reads "(with <tag>p:namespaces</tag>)"...

D'oh! Yes.
                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | And gentlemen in England now a-bed /
http://nwalsh.com/            | Shall think themselves accursed they
                              | were not here, / And hold their
                              | manhoods cheap whiles any speaks / That
                              | fought with us upon Saint Crispin's
                              | day.--William Shakespeare, Henry V

Received on Wednesday, 29 August 2007 14:28:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:54 GMT