Re: My report on experiments with unused namespaces
> There are several reasonable starting points for defining what parts of > an XML document are information-bearing: two that agree reasonably > closely (though not 100%) are the XML canonicalization spec and the XDM > data model. Note that QName's in content meant that another XML c14n method had to be defined, one where "unused" namespaces are stripped, unless specifically directed to be included. > one might > imagine a stronger form of canonicalization that, for example, moves all > namespace declarations to the outermost element, changes the prefixes, > and deletes namespace declarations that are not used in any element or > attribute names. You might take the view that people should write their > applications in such a way that they continue to work after such a > change; and others might legitimately take a different view. This is in > the realm of "best practice", where no two people will agree. This would mean that nobody could take a signed document and embed it in another one, such as SOAP. A use case I kinda care about :) /r$ -- STSM, WebSphere Appliance Architect https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/soma/
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format