W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > August 2008

RE: (still few) troubles with p:namespaces

From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:24:28 -0400
Message-ID: <6E216CCE0679B5489A61125D0EFEC7870C4E6AC3@CORPUSMX10A.corp.emc.com>
To: <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>

> I have still trouble to fully understand the code fragment provided as
> sample in the spec
> 
> Especially this one
> 
> [[
> <p:pipeline type="ex:delete-in-div"
>             xmlns:p="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc"
>             xmlns:ex="http://example.org/ns/ex"
>             xmlns:h="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
> <p:option name="divchild" required="true"/>
> 
> <p:delete>
>   <p:with-option name="match" select="concat('h:div/',$divchild)">
>     <p:namespaces xmlns:h="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
>                   xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"/>
>   </p:with-option>
> </p:delete>
> 
> </p:pipeline>
> ]]
> 
> In my understanding, the binding of the prefix "h" has been done on
> p:pipeline element, so we don't need to recall the binding on
> p:namespaces element, do we ?
> 
> Furthermore again by the same rule ("Otherwise, the in-scope
> namespaces from the element providing the value are used."), we can
> completely get rid of p:namespaces in this case
> 
> <p:delete>
>   <p:with-option name="match" select="concat('h:div/',$divchild)"
> xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"/>
> </p:delete>
> 
> Am I right ?

I think you are right. (Although I first had to go through a couple of
iterations where I tried to prove you are not... :) In this case, I
don't think you need p:namespaces at all.


Regards,
Vojtech
Received on Thursday, 21 August 2008 13:25:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 21 August 2008 13:25:55 GMT