Re: Namespace Fixup Proposal

/ Alex Milowski <> was heard to say:
| On 9/6/07, Norman Walsh <> wrote:
|> / Alex Milowski <> was heard to say:
|> | There are some steps, like p:insert and p:replace, where fixup isn't
|> | the correct thing.  Those steps should preserve the in-scope namespaces
|> | so that any content that relies up it still works.
|> How can fixup be the wrong thing? In fact, how does fixup even arise
|> in p:insert or p:replace; they exchange elements and, assuming that
|> the input document has the right namespace bindings, the output must,
|> mustn't it?
| Sorry... that's no quite what I meant.
| Namespace fixup would only guarantee that the elements and attributes
| had their namespaces declared.  If you had content that relied upon
| in-scope namepaces on the element being inserted or that is the replacement,
| you'd lose those in-scope namespaces that aren't used by the element or
| attribute names.


When I insert an element into a document, I expect *all* of it's
in-scope namespaces to travel with it. How else could insert be
expected to be useful?

                                        Be seeing you,

Norman Walsh <> | Internet connection, $19.95 a month.            | Computer, $799.95. Modem, $149.95.
                              | Telephone line, $24.95 a month.
                              | Software, free. USENET transmission,
                              | hundreds if not thousands of dollars.
                              | Thinking before posting, priceless.
                              | Somethings in life you can't buy. For
                              | everything else, there's
                              | MasterCard.--Graham Reed, in the Scary
                              | Devil Monastery

Received on Thursday, 6 September 2007 14:09:38 UTC