Yes, in xslt20 branch.
It would be violation of XSLT 1.0 standard to implement
XML 1.1 and Namespaces 1.1 in the main branch.
Igor Hersht
XSLT Development
IBM Canada Ltd., 8200 Warden Avenue, Markham, Ontario L6G 1C7
Office D2-260, Phone (905)413-3240 ; FAX (905)413-4839
Ramesh Mandava
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
un.COM> cc:
Subject: Re: XML 1.1 and Namespaces in
XML 1.1
03/03/2003 11:30 support
AM
Please respond to
xalan-dev
Hi:
>
>----- 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?
I agree that we need to do this in xslt20 branch first. And we can request
XSLT
and XPATH expert groups to consider supporting XML 1.1
Thanks
-Ramesh
>
>-- Santiago
>
>
>
