[XML-SIG] SAX 2.0, again

[uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com]

> The first problem is that of how to represent XML names. SAX 2.0 can
> handle namespaces, and so we must somehow represent namespace-names.
> I can see several different ways of doing this, all with their
> advantages and disadvantages, and would very much like to hear the
> opinion of the XML-SIG on this.
> 
> The alternatives I've thought of are
> 
>  - use (uri, localpart) tuple for namespace-names, simple strings for
>    ordinary names

This is how names are indexed in 4DOM.  However, it can cause some od problems 
if namespace-aware code is mixed with non-ns code.

>  - use (uri, localpart, rawname) for namespace-names, simple strings
>    for ordinary names; rawname must be communicated out of band
>    somehow

I do think it is very important to at least keep track of the prefix, even 
though we'd admonish users not to attach semantic value to them.

>  - use XMLName objects for names, regardless of kind. If these were
>    made immutable and drivers used hashtables of these this might not
>    be too inefficient.

What interface do you have in mind?  What hashing approach?  Simple string 
hashing for string names, and maybe soem concatenation into a single string 
for namespace names?

>  - use separate parameters for uri, localpart and rawname, letting
>    some of these be None depending on what was in the document and
>    what the parser supports.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji
Fourthought, Inc., IT Consultants
uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com	(970)481-0805
Software-engineering, project-management, knowledge-management
http://Fourthought.com		http://OpenTechnology.org