On Oct 25, 2004, at 11:24 AM, Uche Ogbuji wrote:
> I appreciate this implementation difficulty (I assume Qt DOM is purely
> 1.0, then), but I really think it's a bad idea to abuse the namespace
> REC by mandating prefixes.
I'd rather not abuse the *XML* REC by requiring their use!! You are now
in a catch-22 position: either you *require* all OO format readers to
support namespaces *and* XML, or you require them to just require XML.
In the interest of interoperability, I know which one I would choose.
> A suggestion of prefix is OK, but not a mandate.
Why not? You're either going to have to mandate a prefix, or mandate
use of namespaces which are *not* part of the XML specification. Why is
is allowable to mandate additional complexity (and hence greater chance
for bugs) in an application (i.e. widely-scoped architectural and
implementation changes), when it is not allowed to mandate use of a
prefix (which ultimately would only change the string constants used
for comparison)? This seems to me to be yet another fallacious
justification for their use.
