Michael Kay wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Michael Kay:
> > > > And I have yet to see a
> > > > > proposal that cleans up the namespace model without
> > > > breaking applications that work today according to the
> > current specs.
> > > >
> > > James Anderson:
> > >
> > > > To the extent that an application expects a
> > prefix-namespace binding
> > > > which was apparent in the dynamic context of a given
> > document's parser
> > > > to have indefinite extent, the application is already broken.
> > > >
> > > Sorry, but we're on a different wavelength.
> >
> > Let's see if we can tune into the same wavelength?
> >
> ...
> > Can a DOM which cannot support operations like
> >
>
> I wasn't talking about DOM, perhaps that's why we're not on the same
> wavelength. DOM's object model precedes namespaces and the InfoSet, and it's
> handling of namespaces leaves me completely bewildered.
Then I will resource to the generic characterisation:
Can a document model which cannot support operations like
[the one demonstrated]
be said to work for documents which are namespace-aware?
Can implementations built on such a document model be said to work for documents
which are namespace-aware?
...
