W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > April 2009

[Bug 6777] In HTML documents, no-namespace expression must match http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml nodes

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:46:03 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1LrDUx-0008Ga-EC@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6777


David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |davidc@nag.co.uk




--- Comment #24 from David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>  2009-04-07 15:46:03 ---
> Right. I filed this Bugzilla item on the wrong spec. (I was unaware that XPath
> 2.0 was incompatible with XPath 1.0, so I thought the latest spec would be the
> most natural place.)

Apart from edge cases in test suites the incompatibilities are pretty hard to
spot. Even if it was 100% compatible reporting an error on xpath2 , which has
the feature that you want (making unprefixed names refer to xhtml) would not
really help. So what possible change could you ask for in the XPath 2
specification?

> My statement of feasibility wasn't about specs. It was about software. That is,
> it's necessary to address this issue in implementations independently of adding
> the entire set of XPath 2.0 features.

Yes exactly. That's why I suggested that you should define a profile of xpath2
that has the features that you think should be supported by a conforming
application.


>  In an implementation that doesn't allow a prefix to be bound to no namespace
> (Gecko currently allows this but WebKit and Presto don't), how would the
> outcome be black-box distinguishable from the behavior I asked about in comment
> #18?


It avoids confusing the poor xpath user.  If you document something as being
xpath 1 then the language implemented should be xpath 1, where it is to be
expected that unprefixed names mean no namespace, and it has been that way for
10 years.

If you document something as being xpath2 then unprefixed names refer to the
default element namespace, which the browser is free to default to xhtml.
or in the words of the xpath 2 spec: "A default initial value for each
component may be specified by the host language. "

If you document a specific profile of xpath2  that avoids certain features not
likely to be implemented in the next range of browsers, so be it, again it's
clear to the user what to expect.

David


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 7 April 2009 15:46:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:57:27 UTC