> Aside from the embarrassment though, it remains the case that the > serializer does not need the assistance of setAttributeNS; it does this > job itself.
There's no such thing as "the serializer". There are hundreds of things called "serializers". DOM3 includes an LS interface that includes "a serializer", but that's just one example. Every serializer has its own properties and behaviors, usually close to undocumented, so relying on that isn't robust. Furthermore, signing takes place in many cases over a DOM, not a serialized document. It is not tenable to create the DOM, serialize it, parse it back in, and then sign it. So you have to ensure namespace correctness in the DOM itself using your own code (or a toolkit designed to address that). The point is, you can't punt this in the manner you described. You may find that insane, but I find that most people conclude that about XML pretty quickly. -- Scott
