DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32360>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32360 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-31 16:10 ------- The XPath 1.0 spec should be fully and correctly implemented, warts and all. I'm not sure I agree (or disagree) that default namespace handling is a wart, but whether it is or not JXPath should follow the spec; not what we think the spec should be. Nor should we provide a mode to turn strict compliance off. I think the cases you're looking at are too limited. there are good and valid reason why the default namespace i snot allowed in XPath expressions.For instance, how do you handle: 1. Unprefixed attributes in the same expression as unprefixed but namespace qualified elements? 2. How do you handle the case where there's more than one default namespace? -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
