This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Discussions on the xml-dev mailing list have suggested that the use of QNames can be problematic, especially when they become disassociated with the documents thay were initially contained in (due to namespace prefix mappings being lost). One way to address this is to use James Clark notation qualified names (e.g. {http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema}element ) rather than QNames that rely on prefixes. A James Clark notation qualified name suggests a type name of JCnQName. Other suggested names are Explicitly Qualified Name (EQName), and Canonically Qualified Name (CQName). The expectation is that this change won't make it into datatypes 1.1., but this entry will formally record it as an input to datatypes 1.2.
If there ever is a 1.2, I would support this. Though I don't think it needs to be a separate data type; rather it's a new lexical representation for an existing type. (It's a big shame that the spec doesn't really recognize this concept: hexBinary and base64Binary should have been the same data type, with facets to select the lexical representation). I've been experimenting in Saxon using the ability to have vendor-defined facets, including "pre-lexical" facets that allow you, for example, to have booleans written as yes|no, or numbers written in Continental European notation, or dates written in North American format. This could be another application of this idea - except that it's not clear what to do with all the baggage that QNames carry about requiring the namespace prefix to be in scope.
At the telcon on 2009-08-21 I took an action: http://www.w3.org/2009/08/21-xmlschema-minutes.html#action02 The WG discussed this issue and found that Michael Kay's comment #1 below gives the appropriate rationale for wanting to close this bug as LATER, specifically that it is a fairly large change coming extremely late. Note that by labelling the bug as LATER, the WG is signalling any WG involved with modifying XML Schema (either the current WG or some other WG) should give this bug due consideration at that time. That said, no changes for this bug will appear in XML Schema 1.1. The WG hopes that the commentor (Pete Cordell) will find this resolution satisfactory. Thank you.
It was the original intent that this bug report record the issue for a future version, so the LATER designation is ideal. Thanks.
The WG reported this bug as LATER on 2009-09-11. We are closing this bug as requiring no futher work. If there are issues remaining, you can reopen this bug and enter a comment to indicate the problem. Thanks very much for the feedback.