Re: Consensus on alternate prefixing mechanism

Manu Sporny wrote:
> It's because of this point that I think that "DEFAULTNS" would be
> preferable to a blank prefix identifier for changing the default namespace.
>
> I believe that we end up with a non-deterministic case if we allow
> arbitrary spaces between mappings and the equal sign AND try and use a
> blank prefix identifier to change the default namespace.
>   
Actually.... I disagree.  I have not tested this extensively, but the 
following regular expression should support it:

(.*?)\s*=\s*([^\s]+)(\s|$)

Prefix ends up in \1, mapping in \2.  \1 will be empty if there is no 
prefix string. \2 is required to be made up of non-white space 
characters and have at least one character. 

Note that I am not advocating this solution.  I don't think this is the 
right way to address the "add reserved words to the collection" 
problem.  I am just saying it would parse fine.

I continue to feel that the prefix mapping issue and the extension of 
reserved words issue are orthogonal.  My proof for this is that I can 
solve issue 2 completely independent of any solution for issue 1. There 
are ways to create a common solution, maybe.  But it is not necessary.  
Moreover, I think that the reserved words extension issue is WAY more 
important than than defining an alternate prefix definition mechanism. 

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com

Received on Friday, 1 May 2009 15:03:23 UTC