[XML-SIG] SAX Namespaces

[Uche Ogbuji]

> Each of these presumes that the namespace processing can be turned off. Is
> that an important/required feature? IMO, the NS processing can/should always
> occur; they are an integral part of XML processing today. The presence of
> namespaces doesn't impact older documents either.
> 
> [ well, there is the case of somebody using ':' in an XML element name but
>   NOT using namespaces. but holy smokes... I don't think we should introduce
>   variations in our APIs based on this edge case. ]

Actually, XML 1.0 deprecates this, so I don't think we should lose _any_ sleep 
over this edge case.

> [ nit: how is #5 different from #4? ]
> 
> I would take option (1) or (3). qname would be the prefix used. If NS
> processing *can* be disabled, then uri==None and name==qname.

I'll admit that Paul's point that the API changes least from SAX 1 to SAX 2 in 
option #4 is pretty attractive (I must have missed this point earlier).  
However, as Paul says, I don't think this is even worth much more argument.  
All the data is available either way.  #1 is also attractive because it's what 
we all murmured assent to earlier.  Not that change is forbidden, but this one 
has proven controversial and comes at the 11th hour.

-- 
Uche Ogbuji                               Principal Consultant
uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com               +01 303 583 9900 x 101
Fourthought, Inc.                         http://Fourthought.com 
4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA
Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python