- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: 23 Aug 2002 17:34:25 +0100
- To: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com>
- Cc: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, "John Verhaeg" <jverhaeg@MetaMatrix.Com>, "XML Schema Mailing List (E-mail)" <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
"Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com> writes: > Of course, note that the W3C XML Schema notion of qualified (has a > namespace) is different from the meaning of qualified in almost all > other contexts involving XML including the Namespaces in XML > recommendation where qualified means "has a prefix". Um, not on my reading. Here's the formal definition of 'qualified name', excerpted from the REC [1] "[Definition:] In XML documents conforming to this specification, some names (constructs corresponding to the nonterminal Name) may be given as *qualified names*, defined as follows: Qualified Name [6] QName ::= (Prefix ':')? LocalPart You will note that the prefix+colon is optional. This is consistent with usage in the rest of the document, although somewhat confusingly on this account unprefixed attributes are none-the-less qualified names. I'm pretty sure that I'm not alone in my usage, summarised as follows: prefixed name: name consisting of two NCNames separated by a colon (:) qualified name: prefixed name appearing as element or attribute name unprefixed name appearing as element name in scope of default NS declaration The XSLT/XPath use of QName is as per attribute names; The W3C XML Schema usage is as per element names. ht [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/#ns-qualnames -- 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 Friday, 23 August 2002 12:38:16 UTC