I guess you’re right. We haven’t revised EXPath packaging for a long time now. Actually, I’m not sure how many people use it at all ;) Anyone out there?
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 4:08 PM Eliot Kimber <eliot.kim...@servicenow.com> wrote: > > I did confirm that if the package @name URI matches the URI of a module, then > the module is resolved, i.e.: > > <package xmlns="http://expath.org/ns/pkg"; > name="http://servicenow.com/xquery/module/now-dita-utils"; > abbrev="now-xquery" > version="0.1" spec="1.0"> > <title>XQuery modules for ServiceNow Product Content processing and > support</title> <xquery> > > <namespace>http://servicenow.com/xquery/module/database-from-git</namespace> > <file>database-from-git.xqm</file> > </xquery> > > … > > </package> > > That implies that each module needs to be in a separate XAR file in order to > also be in a separate namespace. > > I don’t think that is consistent with the EXPath packaging spec. > > In the description of the XQuery entry it says: > > An XQuery library module is referenced by its namespace URI. Thus the xquery > element associates a namespace URI to an XQuery file. An importing module > just need to use an import statement of the form import module namespace xx = > "<namespace-uri>";. > An XQuery main module is associated a public URI. Usually an XQuery package > will provide functions through library modules, but in some cases one can > want to provide main modules as well. > This implies to me that the value of the <namespace> element in the <xquery> > is what should be used to resolve the package reference, not the package’s > @name value, which simply serves to identify the package. > > Is my analysis correct or have I misunderstood the package mechanism? > > Cheers, > E.
