3750 2006-09-18 20:19:05 +0000 [FT] fts namespace 2007-01-08 20:01:01 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XPath / XQuery / XSLT Full Text 1.0 Working drafts PC Windows XP CLOSED INVALID P2 normal --- 1 holstege jim.melton public-qt-comments oldest_to_newest 11839 0 holstege 2006-09-18 20:19:05 +0000 Section 1.2 (Organization) (also in semantics section) Final paragraph. (Editorial/technical) I believe we should in fact define a namespace for fts, because the schemas we use make no sense (and therefore the XQuery that refers to those schema types) makes no sense without it. Further, when we get to building the testsuite, we'll need to have a namespace for these things anyhow, and we would help ourselves and others to have the semantic XQuery and schemas available as usable and syntactically correct wholes. We do need to be careful about the XQueryX namespace versus the semantic schema namespace. The relationship between these schemas is still up in the air (cf my action item), but I think we do a disservice to the community in this case to have an ungrounded prefix. 12410 1 jim.melton 2006-10-12 22:05:22 +0000 I'm uncertain what the test suite has to do with the need for the fts namespace. Do we expect that the functions that appear in the spec will be (normatively) provided by implementations? If not, then I don't understand why the namespace has to be grounded. Isn't it analogous to the fs namespace in Formal Semantics? (Or am I missing something really obvious?) 12905 2 jim.melton 2006-11-10 00:38:35 +0000 The Task Force realized that the confusion was caused by the choice of "xqxfts" as a prefix for the namespace used by the XQueryX syntax for XQuery Full-Text. The editor of that appendix was instructed to change the prefix to "xqxft" to avoid this confusion. The Task Force determined that no namespace needed to be associated with the prefix ftx:. 12920 3 jim.melton 2006-11-13 16:57:44 +0000 (Apologies: I marked this bug as WONTFIX, but was supposed to have used INVALID. I REOPENED the bug to mark it INVALID.)