• From: rbourret@d... (Ron Bourret)
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 14:46:19 +0200

Michael Kay wrote:

> My vote is definitely for (3), though (1) needs to be an
> option for compatibility.
> 
> But rather than pass through the URN of the namespace in
> each call, I would pass an integer identifying it within the
> set of namespaces used in the document, with a separate
> function to map that to a URN.
> 
> I guess people will also want to know the prefix used.
> Although the prefix is theoretically arbitrary, there are
> likely to be many conventional prefixes in use and
> applications may want to leave the prefix unchanged in an
> output document.

I strongly agree (3 with 1 for compatibility).  In addition to the two niceties 
Michael suggests, I would like the parser also to parse the namespace PIs.  Not 
only does this save all applications from writing the same code, parser writers 
probably already have low-level functions they can adapt/use for this purpose.  
The parser would use a separate callback (not processingInstruction) to return 
the namespace information.

-- Ron Bourret

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Prev by Date: Re: XCatalog proposal draft 0.1
• Next by Date: Re: [Q] How should SAX support Namespaces?
• Previous by thread: Re: [Q] How should SAX support Namespaces?
• Next by thread: Re: [Q] How should SAX support Namespaces?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread