Lists Home |
Date Index |
Bob Foster wrote:
>Emmanuil Batsis (Manos) wrote:
>>Ummmm, sorry if this sounds stupid but why do xmlns declarations have to
>>be reported as attributes? Why do they have to be reported at all?
>That was exactly my question. Why are xmlns declarations reported as
>attributes? XSLT has it right.
I guess the reason for this is historical, in that
http://xml.org/sax/features/namespace-prefixes feature has been around
for a while and presumably some people are using it. In general it seems
like a really bad idea, given that SAX reports startPrefixMapping() and
Since the feature is there I agree there should be a standard way of
reporting the default namespace as an attribute to anyone who choses to
process their XML in this way. My vote would be for David's alternative
"b) an attribute with the Namespace URI "http://www.w3.org/2000/xmlns/"
and no local name;" where "no local name" in the context of this
paragraph should be interpreted as meaning a zero-length String.