> What this proves to me is that people don't agree. And there is no way
> to say who's right who's wrong because there is no definition to refer
> to. The fact is that the notions of local name, prefix, and qualified
> name are only defined in the context of Namespaces. Once you're out of
> this context they therefore don't mean anything.
>
> This is why I think it is best to leave them alone (i.e., having them be
> null) when namespaces processing is off.
Hmm, in that case it might also be worth just stipulating that the URI
and localName must always be reported as empty strings when namespace
processing is disabled ... as it stands today, processors are allowed
to report them in that case (but not required). That is, if that
processing is turned off ("out of that context"), it's really off.
On the other hand, I don't think I've heard anything but agreement to
the notion that qName should always be reported ... at least when
processing "real XML" instead of something that already discarded
the prefixes being used.
Those are both categories of implementation variance that the current
SAX spec allows, though which (thankfully) not many implementors have
taken advantage of. In the interest of application portability, I'd
be glad to see them removed in a SAX 2.1 release.
- Dave
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
