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

Re: Towards a consensus draft (urgent)

From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:35:37 -0700
Message-ID: <28d56ece0709101235h27879c00l53fd20474feb414e@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org

On 9/10/07, Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com> wrote:
>
> At 01:06 PM 9/10/2007 -0400, Norman Walsh wrote:
> >[...]
> >bearing in mind that namespace fixup says:
> >
> >    [Definition: Some steps can produce XML documents which have no
> >    direct serialization (because they include nodes with conflicting
> >    or missing namespace declarations, for example). To produce a
> >    serializable XML document, the XProc processor must sometimes add
> >    additional namespace nodes, perhaps even renaming prefixes, to
> >    satisfy the constraints of Namespaces in XML. This process is
> >    referred to as namespace fixup.]
>
>
> Can anyone produce a pipeline that exemplifies the process known as
> "namespace fixup"?

Given the latest draft with Norm's proposed wording, a pipeline with a single
p:add-attribute step with a prefixed QName for the attribute name might cause
namespace fixup.  Whether or not it does depends on whether the
implementation of
p:add-attribute attempts to declare the namespace of the attribute
name.  If it does
not and there is no in-scope namespace declaration for the attribute name, the
serialization of the pipeline output would need to fabricate a namespace
declaration.


-- 
--Alex Milowski
"The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the
inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language
considered."

Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Monday, 10 September 2007 19:35:47 GMT

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