> Here is an example fragment
>
> <a xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" version-id="0.4"
> xmlns="http://example.com">
> ...
>
> In XPath 1.0
> /default:a/@version-id = 0.4 returns true
> but /a/@version-id = 0.4 returns false
>
> In XPath 2.0
> /default:a/@version-id = 0.4 returns an error (prefix not bound)
> and /a/@version-id = 0.4 returns true
>
> (I tried these out in Oxygen and I trust the results)
>
These results are entirely attributable to the way in which oXygen
defaults the parameters controlling XPath evaluation (in particular the
namespace bindings), and not to the XPath specification itself. See:
http://www.oxygenxml.com/forum/topic1538.html
They could have chosen to make the bindings compatible between the two
versions, but they chose instead to take advantage of new features in
the language.
You're right of course that namespaces are far and away the number one
usability problem in XPath for the majority of users, especially casual
users.
Michael Kay
Saxonica
