Karl Waclawek wrote: > > I understand it the same way. The confusion in this thread really is: > if NS processing is off, then which should really represent the > element name - qName or localName? I agree with you that localName is > the more natural candidate.
Actually that'd be a new confusion. The original question dealt with the namespacing-on-but-no-namespace case, where the SAX spec says both URI and localName must be provided (or neither) ... even though some implementations are providing a localName with empty URI. Arnaud's point (that localName is not defined except in the context of namespacing) is IMO good. Conformant code was _never_ allowed to rely on localName in such cases. - Dave --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
