Re: Unserializable documents

/ Alex Milowski <> was heard to say:
| I agree.
| I just went through the serialization specification, XSLT 1.0, and XSLT 2.0 and
| I think we have a problem here in that:
|   * we reference the serialization specification and it does not define
|      or use "namespace fixup"
|   * XSLT 2.0 says that namespace fixup happens when the literal
|     elements are created.  As such, the output of an XSLT 2.0 processor
|     will not need namespace fixup.
|   * XSLT 1.0 says namespace fixup happens at serialization.  It really
|     doesn't define that except to say (section 16.1):
|      "The new tree may contain namespace nodes that were not
|       present in the result tree."
| As such, we'll need to define what we mean by "namespace fixup" and,

I did define that term in 2.2 of the 5 Sep 2007 draft.

| with the wording suggested by Norm, realize that valid XSLT 1.0
| transformations could fail in some xproc implementations if they
| choose to fail on undeclared namespaces.
| One possible solution is to say that we require namespace fixup on
| the output of the XSLT 1.0 step.
| In fact, I'd like to go through all our steps and guarantee that we do the
| right thing with namespace declarations.

I think that amounts to changing 2.2 to say that we require all steps
to perform namespace fixup on their output.

I'm not opposed (in fact, I'm marginally in favor), but at the last
telcon at least two people objected to that approach.

                                        Be seeing you,

Norman Walsh <> | Wandering in a vast forest at night, I            | have only a faint light to guide me. A
                              | stranger appears and says to me: "My
                              | friend, you should blow out your candle
                              | in order to find your way more
                              | clearly." This man is a theologian.--
                              | Diderot

Received on Wednesday, 5 September 2007 14:39:20 UTC