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

Re: GenX and attribute QNames

• To: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
• Subject: Re: GenX and attribute QNames
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 12:44:06 -0800
• Cc: Simon Fell <xml@z...>,xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <404F5EA0.6000004@d...>
• References: <404F5558.5050902@z...> <404F5EA0.6000004@d...>

On Mar 10, 2004, at 10:29 AM, Rich Salz wrote:

> Hi Simon!
>
>> Othen than pointing out how evil QNames in content are, anyone have 
>> any suggestions on how these things might be incorporated into the 
>> API without breaking the canonicalization ?
>
> Outputting an extra namespace won't break the canonicalization as long 
> as you only add the namespace declaration once.
>
> If Tim provided an API that allowed you to add namespace nodes to the 
> root, then that would be safe.

Er, I thought that canonical XML required that namespace names be 
declared only at the first point they're used.  Am I wrong?

If I'm right, it's a big problem; it means you can't have a qname in an 
attribute value unless that namespace has already been used in a 
containing element or one of its attributes.  So I'm probably wrong.  
Rich?
-Tim

smime.p7s

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: GenX and attribute QNames
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• References:
  • GenX and attribute QNames
    • From: Simon Fell <xml@z...>
  • Re: GenX and attribute QNames
    • From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: SAX CVS
• Next by Date: Re: SAX CVS
• Previous by thread: Re: GenX and attribute QNames
• Next by thread: Re: GenX and attribute QNames
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread