OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] XML design of ((a and b) or c)

You are quite right; XPath 1 does allow QNames.  I was confusing the
requirement with XML Events, which does not.
My memory for these decisions has faded some since 2002.

However, it's still the case that XForms made the choice not to use
namespace prefixes on its own functions because other W3C specs weren't
using them either, the cases cited being XSLT and Dsig.  See 

-----Original Message-----
From: David Carlisle [mailto:davidc@nag.co.uk] 
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 4:19 PM
To: Klotz, Leigh
Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] XML design of ((a and b) or c)

> On the nighmare issue, originally all XForms XPath extension functions
> were in the XForms namespace, but we removed that as a result of
> comments that showed that the XPath 1.0 Recommendation did not allow
> qualified names, 

??? XPath1  (and now 2) specifies function names are QNames.

> and that neither XSLT nor XML Signature W3C
> recommendations specified qualified names as extension functions.  

??? XSLT 1 mandates that all extension functions use qualified names
a non empty prefix. xslt 1 says:

  If a FunctionName in a FunctionCall expression is not an NCName
  (i.e. if it contains a colon), then it is treated as a call to an
  extension function 

> extension functions would be namespaced in XPath 2.0.  But the botch
> with XPath 1.0 not allowing them.

In what way are they disallowed in XPath 1?


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS