W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > November 2009

Re: exclude-inline-prefixes question

From: Innovimax W3C <innovimax+w3c@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:23:49 +0100
Message-ID: <546c6c1c0911100823s21021659p8d3470231fa44d8c@mail.gmail.com>
To: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Well in that case, I propose to spell it "exclude-unused-prefixes"

Mohamed

On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
> "Toman_Vojtech@emc.com" <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com> writes:
>
>> I am not sure that the tests exclude-inline-prefixes #006 and #007 are
>> actually correct. For example, this is what the test #006 does:
>>
>> <p:identity>
>>  <p:input port="source" xmlns:test="http://www.test.com">
>>   <p:inline exclude-inline-prefixes="test"><test:doc/></p:inline>
>>  </p:input>
>> </p:identity>
>>
>> The test expects this to succeed, but because the namespace bound to
>> "test" is explicitly excluded, shouldn't the processor fail when it
>> encounters <test:doc/>?
>>
>> If this is indeed the case and the processor should fail, what error
>> should it report?
>>
>> (Sorry if I just got confused.)
>
> No, but it's easy to get confused. The exclude-result-prefixes behavior
> can only exclude namespaces that aren't actually used.
>
>                    Be seeing you,
>                     norm
>
> --
> Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Unless one is a genius, it is best to
> http://nwalsh.com/      | aim at being intelligible.--Anthony Hope
>



-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 
Received on Tuesday, 10 November 2009 16:24:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 10 November 2009 16:24:29 GMT