- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: 04 Dec 2002 19:56:05 +0000
- To: "Kay, Michael" <Michael.Kay@softwareag.com>
- Cc: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
"Kay, Michael" <Michael.Kay@softwareag.com> writes: > I noticed that in the draft schema 1.1 requirement there is nothing relating > to the QName data type, which is one of the most problematic data types of > all. > Here are some suggestions: > > 1. Clarify whether the namespace URI of a QName that is written with no > prefix is the null namespace or the default namespace, or whether it's > entirely up to the application to decide. Possibly, allow this to be > controlled via a facet. Where is clarification required -- I wasn't aware there was any area where is was not clear that unprefixed QNames are default-namespace qualified. > 2. Consider providing a lexical representation of QNames that uses the > namespace URI and local name rather than a prefix and local name. For > example > > "{uri}localname" > > This would allow applications to construct QName values that don't depend on > the in-scope namespace declarations and that can be safely copied-and-pasted > from one XML fragment to another. It would remove the anomaly that the QName > data type is currently the only data type where a lexical representation > cannot be computed as a function of the value-space value. > > Make this the canonical lexical representation of a QName. Thanks, useful suggestion. ht -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh W3C Fellow 1999--2002, part-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2002 14:56:04 UTC