- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:52:46 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6131
Vladimir Nesterovsky <vladimir@nesterovsky-bros.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |vladimir@nesterovsky-
| |bros.com
--- Comment #19 from Vladimir Nesterovsky <vladimir@nesterovsky-bros.com> 2009-07-31 09:52:46 ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> (In reply to comment #16)
> > We already use pseudo-functions for NameTests, e.g.
> >
> > element(customer)
> >
> > Why not use a similar notation for expanded names?
> Because that doesn't work at all well for variable, function or template names.
That depends on how would you integrate such pseudo-function into the grammars.
I think
expanded-name(http://example.com/customer, customer)
or
qname('http://example.com/customer', 'customer')
or even
QName('http://example.com/customer', 'x:customer')
are clear candidates achieving desired effect, and and verbose at the same time
that prevents wide adaptation comparing to the regular form.
--
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 Friday, 31 July 2009 09:52:56 UTC