Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...> writes:
> At 6:48 AM -0400 4/28/00, David Megginson wrote:
> >Yes, I was reluctant to make the change, but I got a lot of flak
> >(private and public) for choosing "RawName" over "QName", especially
> >when other XML-related specs use the latter.
>
> As long as we're making the change from RawName, is there any chance
> we could use getQualfiedName() instead of getQName()? QName is really
> only an abbreviation used in the BNF grammar. The namespaces spec
> elsewhere spells it out as "qualified name". QName is quite cryptic.
> QualifiedName seems a little more legible to me.
A worthy suggestion, but I'd prefer not to ambush implementors twice
in a row. I know that anyone implementing a beta or pre-release takes
her chances, etc. etc., but it's still nice not to make life hard for
them without a strong reason.
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson david@m...
http://www.megginson.com/
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@x...&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************
|
