RE: well-known namespace prefixes

Ah, excellent summary! Nice to know the information is there somewhere, even
tho it is (I think) in a slightly less than obvious place. At least you've
given me a new toy, so I'm somewhat mollified. :-) I think my comments below
remain reasonable.
Best,
Howard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Rys [mailto:mrys@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 7:13 PM
> To: Howard Katz; public-qt-comments@w3.org
> Subject: RE: well-known namespace prefixes
>
>
> Actually the normative appendix on the static context items lists them
> normatively as known apriori. See
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery/#id-xq-static-context-components
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-qt-comments-
> > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Howard Katz
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 4:45 PM
> > To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
> > Subject: well-known namespace prefixes
> >
> >
> > I don't know if this is making a mountain out of a molehill, but I
> find
> > the
> > description of the five predefined namespace prefixes in the main
> XQuery
> > 1.0
> > document [1] a bit confusing. In particular, the wording "This
> document
> > uses
> > the following predefined namespace prefixes" is potentially misleading
> --
> > at
> > least it was for me the first time I encountered it -- in that the
> phrase
> > "This document uses ..." seems to imply that the prefixes are being
> used
> > in
> > the specification document for pedagogic purposes only, while in fact
> the
> > prefix-uri associations are normative (ie, they're "well-known" and
> can be
> > used in queries w/out requiring the user to declare them in the prolog
> > first).
> >
> > I haven't found any other clear, unambigous statement in any of the
> XQuery
> > documents that these five default associations are normative (tho
> there's
> > at
> > least one related mention in the F&O document [2] for three of them);
> > possibly this is a good place to do so. Rather than saying "This
> document
> > uses ...", how about a less amibiguous statement such as, "The
> following
> > predefined namespace prefixes are "well-known" and can be used in
> queries
> > without declaring them explicitly in the prolog" or some such.
> >
> > Lastly, just out of curiosity, are these default associations
> considered
> > examples of "statically known namespaces" in the static context [3]?
> >
> > Howard
> >
> > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery/#id-basics
> >
> > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-functions/#namespace-prefixes (note
> that
> > "defalt" is misspelled in the text)
> >
> > [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery/#dt-static-namespaces
>

Received on Wednesday, 28 July 2004 00:47:55 UTC