> Presumably they realize that this is going to make it very difficult to
> reuse XSLT and XQuery code to handle the shared components? There's some
> support for it in 2.0 through the *:local-name construct, but it's a bit
> kludgey.

Yep. But a lot of the reasoning behind the decision is the working group 
process at the design level. Ultimately it comes back to versioning-- 
and the assumption is that versioning needs to be done through the 
namespace. In addition, uniformity of structure cannot be achieved so it 
is assumed that each divergent structure with a duplicate name needs to 
be in a different namespace.

I am not sure either of those assumptions are true; but certainly they 
are easier. Luckily, there is very little overlap in the real world-- 
meaning you don't typically see any two <BORROWER> elements in the same 
document (most of the XSLT will be used to carry one set of concepts 
from a transactional instance to some in-house representation, or from 
one instance to another instance for coordination).

 > There's some support for it in 2.0 through the *:local-name
 > construct, but it's a bit kludgey.

Can't this kludge be approximated through the (even more kludgey) kludge of:

*[local-name()="foo"]

Cheers,
Jeff Rafter

From nobody@w... Fri Dec 03 21:36:47 2004
Receive