- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:28:58 -0000
- To: <lists@jeffrafter.com>, "'Nigel Hardy'" <nwh@aber.ac.uk>
- Cc: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
> Agreed. Except that I think it feels wrong because nothing > else in the > spec works this way. QNames are already present in other > locations, why > does the default namespace not apply to the XPath steps in > content? No > don't answer that... I know I know... it's just that it > *should* work :) XSLT 1.0/XPath 1.0 decided that when QNames appeared in attribute content, they would behave like attribute names - that is, the default namespace would not apply; but when XML Schema 1.0 introduced namespaces in their content, they decided they would behave like elements - the default namespace *would* apply. So where you have both conventions in the same XML document, it is indeed confusing. We do try to coordinate, honest! Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Received on Sunday, 27 February 2005 23:29:17 UTC