- From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 20:11:39 +0100
- To: Joseph Kesselman <keshlam@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: Christian Geuer-Pollmann <geuer-pollmann@nue.et-inf.uni-siegen.de>, XML Signature WG <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>, Joseph Kesselman <Joseph_Kesselman@lotus.com>
Joseph Kesselman wrote: > Clarification: The quote re > "I'm not sure whether this should be marked as LATER, > or as WONTFIX since we expect that XSLT2 will actually > make what we're doing legitimate." > refers specifically to the fact that Xalan does not replicate the Namespace > Node onto every child node -- it does support the namespaces axis, but does > so by returning the Namespace Node at the point where the namespace was > declared. This difference is essentially invisible unless you absolutely > insist on counting the Namespace Nodes present in a subtree or asking for > their parents -- both of which are _EXTREMELY_ rare operations in > real-world stylesheets and XPaths. True enough. I have found this, in a real world application, writing a pretty printer in XSLT and noticing that the resulting document was quite different depending on the XSLT processor I was using but I reckon that this is a very specific operation. > Xalan does put a heavy emphasis on standards compliance. But my best > information at this time suggests that the XSLT committee has recognized > that this concept of replicating the Namespace Nodes onto all the > descendents was a Bad Idea in the first place, and that they are planning > to remove the ability to ask the questions which expose this difference. If > they do so, Xalan will probably be fully compliant as it stands. OTH, XSLT 1.0 will probably be used still for a while and it seems like a good idea to be compliant with it as it stands today, or I have missed something else? Eric > I'm not sure why this affects anyone writing a canonicalizer. Ideally, you > shouldn't care where the namespace was actually declared. Since that > doesn't affect the semantics of the document, I would expect > canonicalization to suppress that information...? > > ______________________________________ > Joe Kesselman / IBM Research > > > -- See you in Orlando for XML 2001. http://www.xmlconference.net/xmlusa/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com http://xsltunit.org http://4xt.org http://examplotron.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 26 November 2001 14:11:43 UTC