RE: WD-xpath-functions-20030502: casting xs:QName

> > The terminology we are trying to use is "lexical QName" for the
> > (prefix, local-name) pair, and "expanded QName" for the (uri, 
> > local-name) pair. I agree that we need to be very careful about the 
> > distinction and this isn't always true of the current drafts.
> 
> please explain why, in the case of standards which are as central as 
> the further development of xml applications, it is appropriate to use 
> terminilogy which is bound to engeder confusion, instead of 
> terminology 
> which is inherently unambiguous.
> 
Please explain why you think these terms are likely to engender confusion.

The term "lexical QName" to my mind creates the clear impression that we are
talking about values in the lexical space of the xs:QName data type. The
term "expanded QName" relates closely to the familiar term "expanded name"
which was used in XPath 1.0, and suggests the result of expanding a lexical
QName by replacing prefixes with the corresponding URI.

We have a problem in this area, because the Namespaces Rec and the Schema
Rec use the word "QName" to mean different things. We therefore decided to
use an adjective that makes it clear which kind of QName we are talking
about.

Michael Kay