> Agreed. Except that I think it feels wrong because nothing > else in the > spec works this way. QNames are already present in other > locations, why > does the default namespace not apply to the XPath steps in > content? No > don't answer that... I know I know... it's just that it > *should* work :) XSLT 1.0/XPath 1.0 decided that when QNames appeared in attribute content, they would behave like attribute names - that is, the default namespace would not apply; but when XML Schema 1.0 introduced namespaces in their content, they decided they would behave like elements - the default namespace *would* apply. So where you have both conventions in the same XML document, it is indeed confusing. We do try to coordinate, honest! Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/Received on Sunday, 27 February 2005 23:29:17 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 16 March 2009 11:13:32 GMT