W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: [selectors-api] querySelector with namespace

From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:38:38 +0100
Message-ID: <4B13D8EE.1020103@lachy.id.au>
To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Cc: Jonathan Watt <jwatt@jwatt.org>, public-webapps@w3.org
Robin Berjon wrote:
> On Nov 26, 2009, at 15:07 , Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>> Jonathan Watt wrote:
>>> Nevertheless, that doesn't mean that Web content shouldn't be
>>> able to process XML that uses xml:id using script and present the
>>> processed information to the user using content and semantics
>>> that *does* "belong on the Web".
>>>
>>> Anyway, please also note that xml:id was just the example that
>>> drew my attention to this defficency in querySelector. It's an
>>> example, nothing more. The deficiency is my focus here.
>>
>> I really do not understand what use case you are trying to address.
>> It appears that you are trying to find a solution to a problem that
>> does not exist.
>
> That's because you're not reading what Jonathan has been saying. He
> said xml:id was just the example that drew his attention to the fact
> that the selectors API can't do namespaces.

Yes, I know what he said.  The point is that since he agrees that xml:id 
can't be used in practice on the web, and because even if it could, the 
ID selector would be good enough, it's not really a compelling, 
real-world use case for *why* namespace resolution is needed.  And other 
than xml:id, he didn't clearly describe any other use cases at all.

> He points out, rather correctly, that there is no reason that Web
> content shouldn't be able to process XML and present the processed
> information  to the user.

The question is not and should not be about proving why it shouldn't be 
able to process XML with namespaces.  The question is about why is it 
worth spending any more time, money and effort than we already have 
developing a solution for namespace prefix resolution?  That is the 
question that namespace proponents have continually failed to address, 
and is why I have so far not deemed the issue worthy of significantly 
more of my time.

> The lack of namespace resolution in selectors is extremely annoying
> because it means that one has to switch between selectors (if only
> for classes support) and the XPath APIs for namespace support
> whenever one tries to do, you know, one of those real-world things
> where you have to aggregate data from multiple sources that might not
> be talking to one another.

Please clearly explain what "one of those real-world things" are, where 
selectors without namespaces is inadequate.  In fact, if you could show 
some real world examples of where sites are switching from selectors api 
to xpath for the namespace support, or using some other work around, 
that would go a long way towards understanding what the use cases are, 
and what problems really need to be solved, as well as help in 
determining whether or not the problems are significant enough to be 
worth addressing.

-- 
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/
Received on Monday, 30 November 2009 14:39:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:35 GMT