Chris Lilley wrote:
> 
> Francois Belanger wrote:
> >
> > James Clark wrote on 04/01/99 19h16:
> 
> > >Issue (pattern-namespace-wildcards): Should patterns of the form foo:*
> > >or *:foo be allowed?
> >
> > Yes, it's really needed, so is @*:foo or @foo:* for attributes, the
> > syntax is simple and intuitive.
> 
> No, it should not be allowed.
...
> The key point here is that equality is beased on the declared namespace
> *name*, not the namespace *prefix* which happend to be used in a
> particular instance.

That is exactly how foo:* would work.

A template

 <xml:template match="foo:*" xmlns:foo="http://www.foo.com/">...</>

would match any name whose namespace was http://www.foo.com/
irrespective of the prefix.

This parallels what XSL already does with prefixed names. A template

<xml:template match="foo:bar" xmlns:foo="http://www.foo.com/">...</>

matches an element

<f:bar xmlns:f="http://www.foo.com/"/>

or

<bar xmlns="http://www.foo.com/"/>

Since XSL is in XML syntax, we don't have to invent a new mechanism for
specifying expanded names; we can use the standard XML one.

James


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list