Having worked with setting default namespaces rather a lot in various contexts (XSLT, XQuery, Schematron, I vote enthusiastically for 1). This really just amounts to a change that reduces verbosity, as Syd indicates, but also reflects the default centrality of the TEI in the Stylesheets anyway. And it is a pain to have to remember the default prefix all the time when we gave to edit. Elisa Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 4, 2019, at 3:54 AM, Peter Stadler
wrote: I honestly prefer the verbosity of 5) — and I don’t think these XPath expressions can be significantly simplified nor compressed by removing those namespace prefixes. But just to make double sure: This is just a (proposed) cosmetic change due to your personal preference, right? This wouldn’t be bad thing, though, and I think you deserve to do it your way since you are the ODD one :)
Cheers Peter
Am 04.01.2019 um 02:18 schrieb Syd Bauman
: The current odd2odd.xsl (like most of the stylesheets) uses the explicitly bound namespace prefix "tei:" in XPaths. I am inclined to use @xpath-default-namespace and get rid of them. I think our XPaths are often already long enough to wrap around even a wide screen twice, and things like "ancestor::tei:teiHeader" are just harder to read.
Please vote (fast): 1) I very much want to get rid of the "tei:" prefix in XPaths 2) I prefer to get rid of them, but don't care much 3) Makes no difference to me, mate 4) I prefer to keep them, but don't care much 5) I very much want to keep the "tei: prefix in XPaths
In case you're curious, there are approximately 517 tei: 38 rng: 15 xs: 5 a: 4 xml: 2 sch: prefixes in odd2odd.xsl. (Looking only in attr values.) _______________________________________________ Tei-council mailing list Tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
_______________________________________________ Tei-council mailing list Tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council