[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> (1) It is a deduction from the Namespaces spec that attributes without any
> prefix are in no namespace.
yes surely that is clear.
> It is implicitly _not_ an error to have no-namespace attributes
> which _are_ the attributes defined in the spec. I can't _find_ anything
> which specifies any processing for these elements
I don't understand this comment at all. the definition of the processing
of (say) the xsl:template element is almost all taken up with telling
you how to process the non-namespaced attributes match, name etc.
> it does suggest that the XSLT authors rather
> expected that no-prefix attributes would be in the element's
> namespace;
I doubt it. If they did it is rather strange that they defined Xpath they
way they did. If you ask Xpath for the namespace of the match attribute
in <xsl:template match=... you will get the value "" not the URUI of the
XST namespace.
> (c) that, unless I've
> missed something, and the logic above is wrong, XSLT processors are
> acting _as_if_ unprefixed attributes are in the namespace of the
> containing element
No. If an XSLT processor acted as if match was in the xslt namespace
in
<xsl:template match=...
then
a)
<xsl:template xsl:match=...
would work as it would be equivalent.
and
b)
namespapace-uri(document('')/*/xsl:template/@*)
would return "http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform""; not ""
David
_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.
|
