W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > September 2007

Re: Towards a consensus draft (urgent)

From: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 18:14:08 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org

At 04:03 PM 9/10/2007 -0400, Norman Walsh wrote:
>/ Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com> was heard to say:
>| At 01:06 PM 9/10/2007 -0400, Norman Walsh wrote:
>|>bearing in mind that namespace fixup says:
>|>    [Definition: Some steps can produce XML documents which have no
>|>    direct serialization (because they include nodes with conflicting
>|>    or missing namespace declarations, for example). To produce a
>|>    serializable XML document, the XProc processor must sometimes add
>|>    additional namespace nodes, perhaps even renaming prefixes, to
>|>    satisfy the constraints of Namespaces in XML. This process is
>|>    referred to as namespace fixup.]
>| Can anyone produce a pipeline that exemplifies the process known as
>| "namespace fixup"?
>I'm not exactly sure what you mean, but [...]

What I mean is this... Above, you say "This process is referred to as
namespace fixup." So, if there is a "process", surely XML Proc can
be used to describe the process and implementations can run it.
So, I was asking whether you, or anyone within shouting distance,
could write the pipeline that describes the namespace fixup process.

I actually suspect that it is more of a rhetorical question; that it is not
possible to write such a pipeline, and that "namespace fixup" is not
quite a process so much as a set of guidelines.

If it is a process, then let's have the pipeline and declare victory.

If it is not a process, let's admit it and provide whatever guidance we can
and in as much detail as we need to make everybody comfortable with the
probability of multiple implementations performing "namespace fixup"
in reasonably consistent manner, where "reasonably consistent" is as 
by bankers and other conservative businessmen, not jazz musicians.

I take it that Alex is not yet comfortable. As a result, neither am I.

I am not likely to be comfortable until at least all of the implementors
in the WG are comfortable. I appreciate that this is slowing us down
on the road to recommendation.


Received on Monday, 10 September 2007 22:16:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:44 UTC