- From: David Carlisle <david@dcarlisle.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 00:56:58 +0100 (BST)
- To: abrahams@acm.org
- CC: xml-uri@w3.org
> But the same objection may not apply to changing XPath, I think it would. > In fact, changing XPath to go with the > literal interpretation would bring James Clark's processor into > conformance All known xpath implementations, I think. > This example is different from the others, I believe, since It's the same as the others, you can get the same effect without xml base using external entities. > In retrospect, the idea of providing both namespace-uri and > namespace-name functions seems to be the most desirable solution. The > question is: what would break were it to be adopted? Adding functions doesn't help. The question is does <xsl:template match="x:x" xmlns:x="bat"> match <y:x xmlns:y="bat"> Currently the answer according to the namespace spec and xpath implementations is yes and according to the xpath spec is no. That is the problem. Adding functions to xpath doesn't help. Underspecified "an application that knows what it is doing may do what it likes" fudges don't help. The only thing that helps is for the two specs to agree on what the namespace name is. (Ideally they would both agree that the namespace name is "bat", but there are other options as discussed at length on this list, but keeping the two specs giving a different answer is not an option) David
Received on Wednesday, 14 June 2000 19:55:31 UTC