Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Simon St.Laurent" <email@example.com>
- To: xml-dev <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 09:20:46 -0500
At 09:00 AM 1/7/00 -0500, David Megginson wrote:
>Basically, the difference in pseudo code is this:
>In other words, there's not a very significant difference between the
>two. The main problem is that the spec is just so much harder to read
>and understand that it had to be.
Yes, but is SAX2 going to continue that confusion, or is it going to
Basically, there are three choices.
1) Ignore problem - let chaos continue, and force apps and developers to
deal with pseudo-code stuff above.
2) Make a choice - SAX2 defines a namespaces best practice, makes itself
simpler than the spec. You seem to lean toward 'attributes with no prefix
inherit their element prefix'.
3) Provide an option and a default - SAX2 makes a choice, but lets
applications opt for the other choice without requiring developers to
understand namespaces enough to implement that pseudocode.
I'd push _hard_ for 2 or 3. SAX2 has to make one of these 3 choices. Which?
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
Building XML Applications
Inside XML DTDs: Scientific and Technical
Cookies / Sharing Bandwidth
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)