- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 18:57:44 +0100
- To: Andrew Clover <and-w3@doxdesk.com>
- Cc: www-dom@w3.org
Andrew Clover wrote: > Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr> wrote: >>whether it is legal to use it with a defined nsURI, and a qName that >>doesn't contain a prefix part. > > Sure it is. For example, the element in '<a xmlns="a"/>' has a non-null > namespaceURI but no prefix. It must be possible to create the element by > DOM methods without having to create the namespace declaration attribute. True, and the spec does mention xmlns but as a special case (which it is, I surely hope no other prefix-less attribute can be considered to have a namespace in XML :) I didn't find it clear from the text that setting a nsURI and no prefix was allowed. >>Most implementations seem to accept it, and then fail to serialise it >>properly. > > Up until DOM Level 3, there was nothing to say how (if at all) namespace > fixup should be done in this case. This is better defined in the latest > specs (dependent on the value of the 'namespaces' parameter to > DOMConfiguration, an imp might be expected to do the fixup on serialisation > and/or normalisation), with a suggested algorithm, so imps should hopefully > become more standardised on this issue. Yes, I'm not at all worried about that part which so far I've found rosy and fairly straightforward to implement. Thanks! -- Robin Berjon
Received on Wednesday, 10 December 2003 12:57:46 UTC