W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > January to March 2000

RE: CORE: Re Keith's setAttributeNS vs. setAttributeNodeNS

From: Keith W. Boone <kboone@ebt.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 16:38:07 -0500
To: <keshlam@us.ibm.com>
Cc: <www-dom@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000f01bf95d9$3eb081a0$767770c6@ebt.com>

First of all, I'm fairly sure I meant attr.getName(), because
setAttributeNS() requires a qualified name, which is what getName() is
supposed to return -- yes?

Secondly, you can assume the attr in my example is created using the
createAttributeNS() method, as the DOM 2 is clear that mixing NS-aware and
NS-unaware calls may be flakey.

Finally, why isn't localName = qualifiedName when a node is created using
the non-namespace aware methods.

	Keith

-----Original Message-----
From: www-dom-request@w3.org [mailto:www-dom-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
keshlam@us.ibm.com
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2000 3:48 PM
To: kboone@ebt.com
Cc: www-dom@w3.org
Subject: CORE: Re Keith's setAttributeNS vs. setAttributeNodeNS


kboone wrote, on the public list:
> Assuming the following Java statements are executed:
>
>    attr.setValue("foo");
>    element.setAttributeNodeNS(attr);
>    element.setAttributeNS(attr.getNamespaceURI(), attr.getName(),
> "bar");
>
> What will be returned by attr.getValue()?

If I'm reading this correctly, this has some serious concerns.

He didn't say how the attr node was created. Two scenarios:

1) createAttribute -- prefix/localname/namespaceURI are all null.
2) createAttributeNS -- attr has the localname and namespaceURI specified
     It may have a prefix.


When we issue setAttributeNodeNS, this Attr replaces any existing Attr with
the same {nsuri}localname. Problem: If it's a non-namespaced Attr, that
means it replaces a non-namespaced Attr but we don't know which, since they
all have null for both values. The results are implementation dependent.

Ugh.


When we issue setAttributeNS()... As written, the line doesn't work; he
probably intended to use getLocalName().

But if it's a non-namespaced node, this still results in our setting the
value for {null}null, which matches any single non-namespaced Attr on this
element. And again, the results are implementation dependent.

Ugh ugh.



Is my analysis in error?
If so, do we still believe this is an acceptable answer?


Note that if we had gone with localname=nodename for non-namespaced nodes,
this particular scenario wouldn't arise; the NS methods would be replacing
{null}localname, and everything would work correctly.



______________________________________
Joe Kesselman  / IBM Research
Received on Friday, 24 March 2000 16:39:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:13:47 GMT