- From: Ian Davis <iand@internetalchemy.org>
- Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 08:28:51 +0100
- To: mark.birbeck@x-port.net
- CC: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
On 18/06/2006 12:59, Mark Birbeck wrote: > My conclusion is that the awkwardness of using XSLT 1.0 to process > XHMTL documents that contain QNames does not justify dropping the use > of QNames as a scoping mechanism, especially since QNames are used so > widely in XML languages. My conclusions are the exact opposite: the lack of support for qnames in the vast majority of XML processing tools DOES justify looking for an alternative. We shouldn't repeat past mistakes. As I pointed out in my response to Karl, a more robust solution would simply to use the full URIs wherever you have currently specified qnames or CURIEs. Ian -- http://purl.org/NET/iand Blogging at... http://iandavis.com/blog Working on... http://directory.talis.com/
Received on Monday, 19 June 2006 07:29:43 UTC