Subject: RE: [xsl] Namespace-alias using #default with no default namespace in scope From: "Buchcik, Kasimier" <k.buchcik@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 12:11:10 +0200 |
Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: David Carlisle [mailto:davidc@xxxxxxxxx] > > Ah! Is a more recent version of the XSLT 2.0 spec available > somewhere? I'm currently reading http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20, > which says: "W3C Candidate Recommendation 3 November 2005". > > as it says at the top of (all) w3c working drafts the > "undated" URI such > as http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20 is always the most recent version (and > updated in place) when newer versions are published. The URI for a > particular draft is always of the form > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/CR-xslt20-20051103/ > > which will always refer to the CR draft even if a later draft is > published. OK. It would be interesting for me to see how the spec evolves. I guess there is a document which is kept up-to-date, but accessible only to W3C-members, right? > > I already searched the spec for something like "#none" to be > > specified if one wants to move elements from/to no namespace. > > Using a "#none" would be clearer in my opinion; additionally > > safer, since, if stylesheets are generated by e.g. multiple > > transformation steps, one might not know at the end if a > > transformation step hasn't decided to generate a default > > namespace declaration on a relevant element like xsl:stylesheet; > > thus a "#default", originally intended to refer to no namespace, > > might incorrectly refer to an existing default namespace in the end. > > > > It's only the bindings that are in scope on the xsl:namespace-alias > element that matter to namespace-alias (as far as resolving which > namespace #default refers to). Yes. What I was referring to is a scenario, where stylesheets are itself the result of a chain of transformations. You have total control over the stylesheet you write, but you might not have total control over what ns-declarations were added to result trees. > > Couldn't there be a rule, or at least a suggestion in XSLT > 2.0 to use > > either the literal namespace prefix or the target namespace prefix? > > xslt2 is a more explict here. the rules imply (and the following note > makes explict) that the stylesheet-prefix is not used in the result. > > These rules achieve the effect that the element generated from the > literal result element will have an in-scope namespace > node that binds > the result-prefix to the target namespace URI, provided that the > namespace declaration associating this prefix with this > URI is in scope > for both the xsl:namespace-alias instruction and for the > literal result > element. Conversely, the stylesheet-prefix and the literal > namespace URI > will not normally appear in the result tree. > > David Great! That's good news. Thanks & regards, Kasimier
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Namespace-alias using #de, Michael Kay | Thread | Re: [xsl] Namespace-alias using #de, David Carlisle |
RE: [xsl] Namespace-alias using #de, Michael Kay | Date | RE: [xsl] Namespace-alias using #de, Buchcik, Kasimier |
Month |