- From: TAMURA Kent <kent@trl.ibm.co.jp>
- Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 12:42:25 +0900
- To: "'IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG (E-mail)'" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
In message "XPath Transform, 3rd version"
on 00/04/06, "John Boyer" <jboyer@PureEdge.com> writes:
> TAMURA-san: You posted a question about order of namespace nodes. The
> paragraph about serializing the namespace and attribute axes states that the
> primary key for lex order of nodes on these axes is the namespace URI, so I
> don't know what the problem is. Do you see a problem with using namespace
> URI (e.g. are you thinking we need to always add the default definition for
> xmlns to the initial evaluation context)?
A namespace declaration has no namespace, that is to say, there
is no namespace binding on "xmlns" prefix. A URI as the value
of a namespace declaration is not its namespace. So, there are
two interpretations:
a) Namespace declaration has no namespace URI. The primary
key is empty. The secondary key is a local name (the declared
prefix.)
b) Regards the value of a namespace declaration as namespace
URI. The primary key is the URI. The secondary key is a
localname (the declared prefix.)
--
TAMURA Kent @ Tokyo Research Laboratory, IBM
Received on Monday, 10 April 2000 23:43:02 UTC