- From: Michael Amster <mamster@webeasy.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:36:59 -0700
- To: www-dom@w3.org
Joseph Kesselman wrote: > > > "normalizeNS - are there examples of unnormalized trees > and normalized trees to reference?" > A namespace-unnormalized tree would typically be one where some or all > nodes use undeclared namespaces, or use prefixes which aren't bound to the > node's namespace, or have namespaces but don't have any prefix at all. > These are all legal states for the DOM, since namespaces are officially > just "syntactic sugar" (per the Namespace Recommendation), but they're a > complication that some application code may not want to deal with -- just > as successive Text nodes are legal in the DOM but may be a nuisance for > some applications to process. Running normalizeNS() will reconcile these by > changing/creating/defining prefixes in some reasonable manner. > > The algorithm currently described in the Working Draft is one proposed > "reasonable manner", included for discussion. As you can see by the many > open issues, a significant amount of discussion is still required. > > > ______________________________________ > Joe Kesselman / IBM Research Joseph: So how do we deal with the following scenarios: 1. We have a prefix without a namespace URI declaration. Do we remove the prefix? Do we create a bogus namespace URI? How do we manufacture declarations? 2. How do we handle ambiguous nodes - children of a namespace node that may have ancestors from another namespace. I assume the most direct parent wins. Most of the other situations are easy except for the comment about how to handle read-only nodes. Any thoughts? How far along is the Xerxes reference implementation? -MA -- ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-WEBEASY-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~ Michael Amster mamster@webeasy.com 1416 2nd Street Tel: 310.576.0770 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Fax: 310.576.2011
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2001 02:37:10 UTC