[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> To be honest, I think that the minimal victory is to finalize the SAX
specs
> as they are (or simply change the qName wording and getXMLVersion
wording).
> If they were finalized as is, JAXP could add a feature which permitted the
> use of 1.1 names. The feature mechanism is perfect for this. Of course
then
> you would need to seek out support for that feature from all of the usual
> suspects... but JAXP would technically be 1.1 compliant and could be
> finished before such support was in the market. Xerces and AElfred2 would
> likely support the feature.
Looking through some of the archives it looks like Elliotte Rusty Harold was
pushing the same thing but Xerces was against it. (Back in November) [1].
Also I went through and tested the four major SAX parsers and none of them
currently support xmlns-uris.
As an aside, the sax-devel lists seem to hate me... I have subscribed a
dozen times and can't post or receive the emails. The newsgroup that you
referred to is really great!
[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.text.xml.sax.devel/139
Jeff Rafter
|
