Hi Michael, I agree with you, that hard coding the prefix "fn" for XPath 2.0 F&O namespace (http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions) in Xerces, is also not correct.
But the problem with prefix "fn" in Xerces is not a problem that will affect users, as users can use XPath 2.0 built in functions in assertion XPath 2 expressions without specifying any prefix. For e.g, following assertion XPath expression would work fine with Xerces-J: string(test) eq 'xxx' But following expression would also work fine as well [1]: fn:string(test) eq 'xxx' But for expression [1] to work, the prefix "fn" need not be declared on the XSD 1.1 "xs:schema" element. That looks ironical. The prefix "fn" at present is redundant for Xerces assertion XPath expressions. Users should simply not use the prefix "fn" (while using XPath 2.0 built in functions) in assertion XPath 2 expressions, and everything would work fine. But you rightly pointed, that this is redundant and we must remove "fn" prefix reference from Xerces code. Also, if users try to use prefix "fn" for any other purpose related to their proprietary use, then F&O prefix "fn" would certainly cause confusion. So it looks to me as well, that this should be corrected. I'll try to do this as well, as I am doing the XSD namespace prefix change for Xerces-PsychoPath interface. On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:47 AM, Michael Glavassevich <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Mukul, > > I noticed in AbstractPsychoPathImpl that the "fn" prefix is also being given > special treatment. I believe that we should not be hard-coding that either. > > Thanks. > > Michael Glavassevich > XML Parser Development > IBM Toronto Lab > E-mail: [email protected] > E-mail: [email protected] -- Regards, Mukul Gandhi --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
