- From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
- Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2007 06:35:13 -0800
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <28d56ece0703030635x17343114sdbe6202bea608b96@mail.gmail.com>
On 3/3/07, Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@sun.com> wrote: > > / Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org> was heard to say: > | I think we need to provide the in-scope namespaces along with any > | parameter or option value so that QName values can be resolved > | properly. I would be very unfortunate if this didn't work: > | > | <p:option name="initial-mode" value="my:start" xmlns:my="..."/> > | > | That is easy for implementors to do but we need to say that parameter > | and option values have their in-scope namespaces from the p:parameter > | or p:option element available to the component or processor, > respectively. > > Huh? The scoping of namespaces says that the above xmlns:my declaration > applies to the p:option. Why on earth do we have to say anything > special? They're QNames resolved against the in-scope namespaces. The value of the parameter is a string and *not* a QName. If that string value represents a QName value (e.g. an initial mode or named template name for XSLT), then the component needs the in-scope namespaces to expand the QName. -- --Alex Milowski "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language considered." Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Saturday, 3 March 2007 14:35:30 UTC