[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: raw names vs qualified names

• From: David Brownell <david-b@p...>
• To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 10:14:55 -0800

Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> 
> I suggest the third argument, rawName, be renamed qualifiedName. The
> reason is that "qualified name" is the term actually used in the
> Namespaces in XML specification ...
> 
> The same change should be made in the endElement() method as well. It's
> aminor change but I think it would help people learn SAX2 a little more
> quickly and help ensure consistency between different XML specs.

Also in the "Attributes" interface ... and ideally in the getRawName()
method.

I actually like this change; it'd improve consistency with, for example,
DOM (which uses "qname" in various spots in its documentation).  I don't
really see a need to introduce any new XML terminology ("raw"), and on
the contrary have seen such things cause mucho confusion.

- Dave

***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@x...&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************

• References:
  • raw names vs qualified names
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: ANN: SAX 2.0 extension proposals.
• Next by Date: Re: org.xml.sax.ContentHandler conflicts with java.net.ContentHandler
• Previous by thread: raw names vs qualified names
• Next by thread: SAX2: NOTATION attribute decls
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread