----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Xerces-J recently added experimental support for XML 1.1 and > Namespaces 1.1, so Xalan-J users acquire some limited support for XML 1.1 > in the form of input documents and stylesheets. However, a serialized XML > document is still restricted to version 1.0. Further, the set of > permissible characters in QNames and NCNames has been expanded by XML 1.1 > and Namespaces 1.1, but a stylesheet would not be able to match or select > such a QName or NCName with a NameTest. >
Shouldn't we wait for the XPath 2.0 working group to adopt XML 1.1 before implementing it? Has anyone evaluated the consequences of implementing an XPath 2.0 parser (or 1.0 for that matter) based on XML 1.1? > It seems desirable to add experimental support for these candidate > recommendations to the Xalan-J processors; I hope that's not a > controversial statement. What I'd like to ask is: do people have a > preference on which branch of Xalan-J they'd like to see that support - > only the xslt20 branch, or the MAIN branch as well? I prefer to see this in the xslt20 branch. In fact, if people think XML 1.1 is so important, and given that XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 specs are not final yet, why don't we ask the expert groups to consider it? -- Santiago
