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

Re: Re: [Sax-devel] Showstopper issue with new Attribute text

• Subject: Re: Re: [Sax-devel] Showstopper issue with new Attribute text
• From: james anderson <james.anderson@s...>
• Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 16:16:58 +0100
• Cc: XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>,SAX Developers' List <sax-devel@l...>
• Organization: nil
• References: <OF24BFF179.96E54E23-ON85256E54.0050C5B0-85256E54.0051D5E1@c...> <p06010200bc7630593567@[192.168.254.4]> <405864E7.3090505@a...>
• Reply-to: james.anderson@s...

David Megginson wrote:
> 
> Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> 
> > The local name property of the attribute information item for an xmlns
> > attribute is xmlns. The prefix property for the attribute information
> > corresponding to an xmlns attribute has no value. Therefore, when SAX
> > reports these I maintain that the local name should be xmlns, not the
> > empty string. The qualified name should also be xmlns. This is still a
> > showstopper issue, even allowing xmlns attributes into the
> > http://www.w3.org/2000/xmlns/ namespace.
> 
> OK, people, what do we do here?  Here are my opinions:
> 
> 1. Anyone who writes an application that actually cares about the Namespace
> assigned to xmlns attributes is f#@$%@#$ed in the head and deserves whatever
> happens.

this is shortsighted.

> 
> 2. That said, we still have a responsibility to try to do the right thing.
> If we get it wrong, though, it doesn't matter all that much (see #1).
> 
> So, bearing all that in mind, what should we report for the following
> Namespace declaration?
> 
>    <foo xmlns="http://www.example.org/ns#"/>
> 
> a) an attribute with no Namespace URI and the local name "xmlns";
> 
> b) an attribute with the Namespace URI "http://www.w3.org/2000/xmlns/" and
> no local name; or
> 
> c) an attribute with the Namespace URI "http://www.w3.org/2000/xmlns/" and
> the local name "xmlns".
> 
> Note that none of these is a clean solution, probably because Namespaces 1.1
> is a bit broken.

agreed.

>     Then again, I doubt it matters much.

disagreed.

>     If no one presents a
> convincing argument, I'll just pick one of the three at random.
> 

the only one which yields a coherent model is c. it does not matter how one
identifies namespace prefixes, but it does matter that the same criteria be
used for all.

> Apathetically yours,

...

• References:
  • Re: [Sax-devel] Showstopper issue with new Attribute text
    • From: David Megginson <dmeggin@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: [Sax-devel] Showstopper issue with new Attribute text
• Next by Date: Re: Re: [Sax-devel] Showstopper issue with new Attributetext
• Previous by thread: Resolved: xmlns and the xmlns-uris feature
• Next by thread: Re: Re: [Sax-devel] Showstopper issue with new Attributetext
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread