- From: Daniela Florescu <danielaf@bea.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:40:31 -0800
- To: "Michael Rys" <mrys@microsoft.com>
- Cc: <public-qt-comments@w3.org>
Michael,
I think the spec is simply unclear what the semantics is in this case.
See BEA's comment:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qt-comments/2004Feb/0455.html
If it remains like Jonathan would desire, and make the scope include
all the subexpressions that are lexically within the element
constructor,
we do require more detailed examples to make users understand this.
See BEA's request for more detailed explanation here:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qt-comments/2004Feb/0443.html
The fact that now the semantics of an expression depends on the lexical
position of the expression within the query will impact on the way users
will make use of the LET clauses and on the functions.
Best regards,
Dana
On Feb 16, 2004, at 3:13 AM, Michael Rys wrote:
>
> Section 3.7.1.2 Namespace Declaration Attributes
> Technical
>
> Namespace declaration attributes should not affect the in-scope
> namespace static context for expressions. We think that only the ones
> in
> the prolog should affect the namespace prefixes inside expressions.
>
> We find the following semantics to be confusing:
>
> declare namespace b="uri1"; <a xmlns:b="uri2">{/b:c}</a> will look for
> {uri2}:c and not {uri1:c}. "uri2" should only affect the construction
> part.
>
> The same should then also hold for the computed constructors.
>
> Thus, we would like to have the following behaviour:
>
> Namespace declaration in prolog: Provides static namespace prefix
> bindings for both constructors and expressions
>
> Namespace declaration on construction: Provides static namespace prefix
> bindings for constructors only, not for embedded expressions.
>
Received on Monday, 16 February 2004 14:39:40 UTC