RE: Names beginning with "xml"

I'm thinking of xpath here ... (or perhaps xslt + xquery)
Given an uXML document and an "off the shelf" xpath/xslt/xquery processor which a n00b has no clue what "namespace support" means or how to configure it.

Will the same xpaths return the same result set as say an uXML xpath processor ?
In particular will

//*[xml:id = "abc123"]
 
or the equivalent xslt match expression ...

be the same in an XML, XML+NS , uXML processor ?

If that passes the Turing test then I think we can claim a reasonable data model compatibility.
But more important to me a *user expectation* compatibility.

I am fairly certain that by completely eliminating colons then the proposal so far would work for all simple names.
But will it work with the above ? I think it might but not sure.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Lee
Lead Engineer
MarkLogic Corporation
dlee@marklogic.com
Phone: +1 650-287-2531
Cell:  +1 812-630-7622
www.marklogic.com

This e-mail and any accompanying attachments are confidential. The information is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any review, disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of this e-mail communication by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately by returning this message to the sender and delete all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.


-----Original Message-----
From: John Cowan [mailto:cowan@ccil.org] On Behalf Of John Cowan
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 2:21 PM
To: David Lee
Cc: Uche Ogbuji; public-microxml@w3.org
Subject: Re: Names beginning with "xml"

David Lee scripsit:

> To get close to achieving the new goal of some reasonable attempt at a
> data model compatibility, we need to define the relationship between
> uXML Names and XML(+NS) QNames. The simpliest in my mind is to ban
> colons and make uXML Name == XML+NS QName.Localname

Things should be as simple as possible, but no simpler.

> Why is it so important to complicate the spec to allow xml: in
> attributes if we assign no semantics to it ?

The level of complication is trivial: a rule that says

        attribute-name :== element-name | "xml:" element-name

is all you need.  And that way, MicroXML users need not invent new
conventions for element identification, language identification,
whitespace control, and base URI specification.

-- 
John Cowan      cowan@ccil.org         http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Statistics don't help a great deal in making important decisions.
Most people have more than the average number of feet, but I'm not about
to start a company selling shoes in threes. --Ross Gardler

Received on Thursday, 16 August 2012 18:52:27 UTC