On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 15:32 -0500, Dale Worley wrote: > On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 15:16 -0500, Scott Lawrence wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 14:48 -0500, Dale Worley wrote: > > > In regard to having sipviewer apply annotations to the siptrace file to > > > show how the file should be displayed: The annotations should have > > > their own XML namespace, so the annotations can be cleanly separated > > > from the trace data itself. > > > > What's wrong with just different element names? > > It would work. But the display annotations are distinctly different > semantically. Putting them in a separate namespace would clarify the > distinction, and maintain separation of concerns between the programs > that extract and process traces, and sipviewer.
Given that we're not using namespace-aware parsers, I think that just adds complexity without adding value. _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
