W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > October to December 2002

RE: xs:QName in Schema 1.1

From: Kay, Michael <Michael.Kay@softwareag.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:28:50 +0100
Message-ID: <DFF2AC9E3583D511A21F0008C7E621060453DE6F@daemsg02.software-ag.de>
To: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk, "Kay, Michael" <Michael.Kay@softwareag.com>
Cc: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org

> 
> > Here are some suggestions:
> > 
> > 1. Clarify whether the namespace URI of a QName that is 
> written with 
> > no prefix is the null namespace or the default namespace, 
> or whether 
> > it's entirely up to the application to decide. Possibly, 
> allow this to be controlled via a facet.
> 
> Where is clarification required -- I wasn't aware there was 
> any area where is was not clear that unprefixed QNames are 
> default-namespace qualified.

The only thing that Schema Part 2 (section 3.2.18) says about the mapping of
the lexical space to the value space for QNames is the Note: "The mapping
between literals in the ·lexical space· and values in the ·value space· of
QName requires a namespace declaration to be in scope for the context in
which QName is used."

It says nothing about whether the mapping is done using the conventions for
element names (no prefix => default namespace) or the conventions for
attribute names (no prefix => no namespace).

One of the first applications to make extensive use of QNames in attribute
values was XSLT 1.0, and it uses the (no prefix => no namespace) convention,
so I am surprised to hear you say that Schema only supports the (no prefix
=> default namespace) convention. This certainly confirms my belief that it
needs to support both: and above all, to be clear as to what it does
support. 

Michael Kay
Software AG
Received on Thursday, 5 December 2002 12:29:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:13:01 GMT