> 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
Regardless of what's more natural, at this point doing anything other than sticking with the current specification would be pointless. Take this document: <my:doc/> With namespace processing off, SAX2 compliant parsers can provide a localName value of either "" or "doc", while qName must be "my:doc". If this were changed in a SAX 2.1 release, 2.1-compliant parsers would always provide a localName value of "my:doc". That would bring us back to square one: you can't rely on localName when namespace processing is off. Yuval --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
