[XML-SIG] SAX Namespaces

Paul Prescod paul@prescod.net
Sun, 09 Jul 2000 22:38:27 -0500

tpassin@home.com wrote:
> ...
> I'm not really disputing that current apps may use the prefix as the
> preferred NS designator.  I am pointing out that the Recs call for
> URI/localname pairs as the key identifiers.

Current RECs call for URI/localname pairs as identifiers. They also call
for rawnames as identifiers.

> >From the Candidate Rec for Level 2 DOM:
> "On the contrary, the DOM Level 2 methods related to namespaces, identify
> attribute nodes by their namespace URI and localName."

Right. And the methods unrelated to namespaces identify them by rawname.

> >From the XPath CR:
> "Some types of node also have an expanded-name, which is a pair consisting
> of a local part and a namespace URI. The local part is a string. The
> namespace URI is either null or a string. ...Two expanded-names are equal if
> they have the same local part, and either both have a null namespace URI or
> both have non-null namespace URIs that are equal."

That's the definition of expanded name. There is also a definition of
"name" which is equivalent to "rawname".

We need both.

XSLT, XPointer, XLink, etc. inherit the behavior from XPath.

> Please note, I'm only addressing tuning the apps to directly support the
> current recs/CRs.  I'm not saying they shouldn't be able to provide or use
> prefixes.

I'm not sure what you are suggesting concretely. You and I agree that
most of the current applications allow you to work based on the rawname
or the URI/localname pair. Therefore we need three pieces of
information. How do you suggest we should represent them?
 Paul Prescod - Not encumbered by corporate consensus
"Computer Associates is expected to come in with better than expected 
earnings." Bob O'Brien, quoted in
	- http://www.fool.com/news/2000/foth000316.htm