- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 11:27:12 -0500
- To: "Paul Cotton" <pcotton@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "Norman Walsh" <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>, <www-tag@w3.org>
At 7:36 AM -0800 1/12/04, Paul Cotton wrote: >The XQuery/XPath specifications [1] use QNames to identify functions in >these languages. Since this is another example of a different use of >QNames it might be good if the finding could state that this is okay. I would prefer the finding to state that this is not OK, as I've already expressed to the XQuery working group. <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qt-comments/2003Nov/0189.html> The use of prefixes on functions and operators in XQuery is very confusing, especially since they tend not to be used at all. In fact, I found that when I simply removed all prefixes from functions and operators and all references to the functions and operators namespaces from my XQuery notes, everything was still accurate, still worked, and was more easily understood by students. If the prefixes aren't even necessary, why do we have them in the first place? I think this is a classic case of the mistaken urge to identify everything with a URI and namespace, whether it makes any sense to do so or not. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003) http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA
Received on Monday, 12 January 2004 11:28:52 UTC