On Monday, September 3, 2001, at 05:32 PM, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
<snip>
> My thinking was that a Rule with no associated namespace URI must be
> matched literally against the qualified Name (i.e. including any prefix).
> In other words, an element
>
> <foo:bar ... />
>
> would be matched by pattern "foo:bar" in such a Rule. This also is -- or
> at least should be :-) -- backwards compatible with the way pattern
> matching worked before namespace awareness was introduced.
that sounds right but i'm still a little confused...
the concrete example in the test case has rules with identical patterns
'*/bar', say.
one of which has associated namespace foo the other has no (null)
associated namespace.
there are 3 logical matching cases for 'root/bar' with varying namespaces.
1.[null namespace] match(null,'root/bar')
2.[matching namespace] match('foo','root/bar')
3.[not matching namespace] match('notfoo','root/bar')
what result should i expect for each?
- robert
