• To: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
• Subject: Re: A multi-step approach on defining object-orientednatureofDOM
• From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
• Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 20:55:12 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <a9pimuc337pffbd6vvnvjo0fnpoq0kb9ft@4...>

> The reality is that scopes are nested, and resolution is
> always with respect to the innermost defining block, not the immediately
> "local" block.

That's an implementation detail, each local block could maintain a pointer 
to its inherited context.  (See, implementation.)

> | It also makes component software easier, since I can just locally use a 
> | "ds" prefix to indicate XML DSIG, without having to globally coordinate 
> | with every part of a program working on a document.
> 
> What if this prefix is already "taken" by an "outer block"?  (Joe Engish's
> typology of "neurosis" and "psychosis" comes to mind.)

Unh, that's the whole point:  it doesn't matter.
	/r$

• References:
  • Re: A multi-step approach on defining object-orientednatureof DOM
    • From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: How to read a DTD file?
• Next by Date: Re: patterns vs. identifiers
• Previous by thread: Re: A multi-step approach on defining object-orientednatureof DOM
• Next by thread: Re: A multi-step approach on defining object-orientednatureofDOM
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread