"Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@virgin.net> wrote: > If we want this API to conform 100% with XPath 1.0, we're kind > of stuck when > dealing with default namespace declarations. But if we care more about > usability, MSXML's approach is more straightforward. > > good example Aaron. > > I would risk this for a clean & early response, with > a compliance goal when we can do it cleanly. No. MSXML's approach is worse than not compliant. It is wrong... if you try to fix it later, you break applications that used the broken approach. I might be able to live with incomplete conformance, but there is no way I can live with incorrect conformance. It is not an option to define another standard because someone thinks it is more straightforward, IMHO. -scottReceived on Sunday, 7 May 2000 14:16:12 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Friday, 25 March 2005 11:19:25 GMT