[xsl] Re: xsl-list Digest 1 Apr 2007 05:10:01 -0000 Issue 1094

Subject: [xsl] Re: xsl-list Digest 1 Apr 2007 05:10:01 -0000 Issue 1094
From: john jacks <john.jacks@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 14:17:00 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:58:06 +0100
To: <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Proposed syntax for namespace binding in XPath
Message-ID: <028301c773e8$0bac8110$6401a8c0@turtle>

I'd like to solicit reactions to a proposal to define an informal standard
for binding namespaces in strings containing XPath expressions.

The syntax I'm thinking of using is:

(:# xmlns=http://default/uri xmlns:p=http://other/uri #:) xpath-expression

Using a special comment has the advantage that XPath processors that don't
understand the notation will ignore it (though I freely admit that
"meaningful comments" have their drawbacks). It avoids use of quotes which
makes it easy to embed in an XML attribute, and it uses space to delimit the
URI - although there is no absolute ban on having a space in a namespace
URI, there are already plenty of things that will break if you do it, so
it's unlikely to cause any new problems.

Since this is all 'in a string value', XPath processors that don't understand
it would treat it as a string surely?
I.e. there is no need to hide it in comments?
Use a PI if you need XML notation. 

Why mess with comments?

The James Clark notation has been around for a while and regularly
re-used?


JJ







		
___________________________________________________________ 
Inbox full of unwanted email? Get leading protection and 1GB storage with All New Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

Current Thread