Re: An XML Namespaces Alternative...

keshlam@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> I need to spend more time reading this, and the reply probably belongs in a
> Namespace-specific or SAX-specific discussion, but one quick nitpick:
>
> >SAX for example is not namespace aware
>
> That should read "SAX 1.0 is not namespace aware". There is always the
> option of releasing a SAX 1.1 to fix that. That's why specs carry version
> numbers... and why some specs include a call that reports the version
> number currently implemented.

Good point.  I think before SAX makes a change to its API though, "XML
Namespaces" in whatever form they end up being should be a final
recommendation.

> (Sax needs an update anyway, IMO, to add an event for comments. DOM is a
> good random-access representation of XML, and SAX is a good streaming
> representation. Both can stand further polishing.)

True, I am just advocating that "Namespaces in XML" should not complicate the
DOM or SAX if it does not need to.  I hope the proposal I have put forth is an
effort at that goal.  I am sure everyone and their brother has their own ideas
about what namespaces should be in XML, but for the most part people have been
silent with any new ideas and have only been critical of the latest draft
(including myself for that matter).

Tyler


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list