Russell Butek
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: RE: [jsr110-eg-disc] QName (COMMITTERS PLEASE READ)
Sam,
Since you're not 1.0, and theoretically people shouldn't be relying on
this behaviour in your implementation, the answer is, there's no
compelling reason to support it, but it's a nice to have in case anyone
actually was relying on it.
I just piped up because I thought it was an "obvious" alternative, and
works out better in that the localPart wouldn't end up in an illegal
state through attempting to use the old Axis form.
--Wes
-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Ruby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 12:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [jsr110-eg-disc] QName (COMMITTERS PLEASE READ)
Wes Moulder wrote:
> Ya'll might not like me stepping in here, but I have two questions
> about this:
>
Hi Wes! You are always welcome here.
> a) isn't a local part of "one:two" illegal?
>
I would think so...
> b) Why not make your QName do both from the valueOf() method?
>
I'm a bit concerned about how code that depended on this feature would
react if, some how, another implementation of this interface were to be
picked up in the classpath. Is there a compelling need to support this
other syntax?
> It should be trivially easy to figure out which one of the two forms
> the string is in, and since a : is illegal in an NCName (what the
> localpart is defined as), it shouldn't be difficult to figure out
> which form it's in.
>
I agree that technically it would not be difficult.
- Sam Ruby
