This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
[4.6.2 fn:format-number] and [9.8.4.3 The language, calendar, and place arguments] each has an occurrence of the phrase: "the in-scope namespaces from the static context" which is bogus. I believe it should be: "the statically known namespaces" in both cases. Similarly, [4.6.2 fn:format-number] has the phrase: "its prefix has not been declared in an in-scope namespace declaration" which should be "its prefix is not found in the statically known namespaces" (Also, in such a situation, would it be okay for a processor to raise XPST0081 instead of FODF1280? Just something to consider when writing test cases.)
Thanks, you are right. The phrase originated when the text was in the XSLT spec - in XSLT, the statically-known namespaces for an instruction are the in-scope namespaces of that instruction considered as an element in the stylesheet document, so the use of the term "in-scope namespaces" is much more natural.
I regret that I overlooked these comments in preparing the 14 June 2011 Working draft. I have now made the necessary changes and they will appear next time we publish.