[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> From: Jonathan Robie [mailto:jonathan.robie@softwareag.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 5:03 PM
> To: Julian Reschke; Evan Lenz; David Carlisle
> Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] The use of XML syntax in XML Query
>
>
> At 10:30 AM 1/4/2002 +0100, Julian Reschke wrote:
>
> >One thing that comes to mind is that XML Query talks about "the namespace
> >URI", while XMLNAMES uses the term "namespace name". Besides, a namespace
> >name takes the form of a URI *reference*, not an URI.
>
> I tried to use vocabulary consistent with XPath 1.0:
>
> "Some types of nodes also have names. XPath fully supports XML Namespaces
> [XML Names]. Thus, the name of a node is modeled as a pair
> consisting of a
> local part and a possibly null namespace URI; this is called an
> expanded-name."
OK, so it's not your fault :-) It's still wrong I think and should be fixed
in the new XPath spec.
> >The other thing that is a bit strange is that because of the
> >copy-rather-than-reference approach XML Query needs to define
> the semantics
> >of XML namespace declarations *at all*.
>
> This I do not understand.
>
> When XQuery operates on an existing document, it uses the
> namespaces of the
> document. Element constructors, however, occur XQuery, and the correct
> namespaces need to be assigned for the constructed elements. My
> intent was
> to say that element constructors treat namespaces pretty much the way you
> would expect them to if you understand XML.
Wouldn't it be much much better just to (be able to) say that they indeed
behave identically?
|
