Re: adding namespaces for added attributes

On 9/4/07, Henry S. Thompson <> wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> Alex Milowski writes:
> > The deleted sentence in at [1] should remain as that makes sure the
> > namespace declaration exist for the attribute.
> >
> > In addition, I think we should do a similar operation for set attributes [2].
> These stand or fall with a global decision about when/if we require
> all bars to serialisation to be detected -- see last week's minutes
> [3] under 'Namespace fixup' and ongoing thread [4].

I disagree.  This is our step and it is a simple process for the step
to generate a namespace declaration if it needs to do so.  If you use
the prefix from the QName, you'll be able to do the "right thing" most of
them time.  When that prefix is bound to a different namespace, the
step just generates a prefix for the namespace declaration.

If the step generates the namespace declartion, no fixup is needed.

This doesn't remove the need to handle namespace fixup in general but,
instead, makes our step behave nicely.

--Alex Milowski
"The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the
inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language

Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics

Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2007 16:36:12 UTC