W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > July 2010

RE: Namespaces bindings on options/vars/params - node-set results

From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 09:57:13 -0400
Message-ID: <997C307BEB90984EBE935699389EC41C01C41A37@CORPUSMX70C.corp.emc.com>
To: <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
Hi all,

I was just wondering about this again and realized that nobody has
commented on this (old) email of mine. Anybody has an opinion?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-xml-processing-model-wg-request@w3.org
> processing-model-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Toman_Vojtech@emc.com
> Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 1:55 PM
> To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Namespaces bindings on options/vars/params - node-set results
> Hi all,
> Item 2 in the first numbered list in section 5.7.5 (Namespaces on
> variables, options, and parameters) says:
> "If the select attribute was used to specify the value and it
> to a node-set, then the in-scope namespaces from the first node in the
> selected node-set (or, if it's not an element, its parent) are used."
> I was trying to write a test case for this requirement, but I realized
> that I don't understand what the above sentence actually means - that
> is, in the context of XProc V1, where the types of options/variables
> parameters are strings (or xs:untypedAtomic). Is this sentence some
> of a leftover that should have been removed, or does it mean that
> *before* a node-set result of an XPath expression is converted to a
> string, the namespace bindings from the first node in the node-set are
> used? If so, could somebody provide an example that would show why
> is needed/useful?
> Regards,
> Vojtech
> --
> Vojtech Toman
> Principal Software Engineer
> EMC Corporation
> toman_vojtech@emc.com
> http://developer.emc.com/xmltech
Received on Thursday, 1 July 2010 13:57:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:48 UTC