WD-query-datamodel-20010607: 4 Nodes: 'expanded QName' [sic]

I note that the document persists in its use of the term "expanded
QName". This is unfortunate. The passage

"An expanded QName is in the value space of xs:QName, and contains a
namespace URI and a local name."

defines a concept which runs counter to common sense. Once a name is
described via a namespace and a local part it is no longer "qualified".
It is "absolute". The expressed "qualification" - as by virtue of a
reference to a binding context and the requisite mapping from a prefix
to a namespace URI, no longer exists.

I surmise, from the "xs" prefix, that this term was chosen to be is
consistent with usage among schemas. That does not change the fact that
"expanded QName" is a contradiction, which will ultimately engender
confusion. This is particularly true of the inevitable short form,
whereby "QName" stands alone, yet has a meaning other than that
established by its use in REC-names.

The terms "Universal Name" and "UName" are to be preferred.

...