By the way, I think there’s a way to do it in pure Schematron, but I am not sure (have to check) if it can be done in the ODD context. If I remember right for pure Schematron at least, the question is whether you have to set the prefix on the Schematron elements or the TEI ones. Elisa Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 4, 2019, at 5:05 AM, Elisa Beshero-Bondar wrote:

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

FWIW, I agree with Raffaele and Peter in preferring the explicitness and clarity of a prefix. Sebastian always used to say that whenever a stylesheet didn't behave as expected, it was a namespace problem. But if Syd is producing a new version, clearly he has the right to make whatever cosmetic changes he is more comfortable with. Might be a good idea to keep the old version around for a while though, just to check nothing has been broken by such  changes, if I may state the obvious. On 04/01/2019 11:44, Raffaele Viglianti wrote:

I always use prefixes. I think it helps with clarity and feels more rigorous/consistent. So my preference would be 5.

Raff

On Fri, Jan 4, 2019, 5:09 AM Elisa Beshero-Bondar mailto:ebbondar@gmail.com wrote:

By the way, I think there’s a way to do it in pure Schematron, but I am not sure (have to check) if it can be done in the ODD context. If I remember right for pure Schematron at least, the question is whether you have to set the prefix on the Schematron elements or the TEI ones.

Elisa

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 4, 2019, at 5:05 AM, Elisa Beshero-Bondar mailto:ebbondar@gmail.com> wrote: > > 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 mailto:pstadler@mail.uni-paderborn.de> 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 mailto:s.bauman@northeastern.edu>: >>> >>> 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 mailto: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 mailto: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 mailto:Tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council