- From: Joćo Eiras <joao.eiras@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 18:45:54 +0100
- To: "Bjoern Hoehrmann" <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
Na , Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> escreveu: > * Joćo Eiras wrote: >> This is a issue, severe from my point of view, as you cannot reuse the >> same logic to retreive those nodes. >> We need to find a way to drop the prefixes and still being able to >> select >> the same nodes. > > I don't understand your argument here. As you point, you can simply use > prefixes and have them resolved properly by a custom namespace resolver. > I'm working aroudn the xpath dom and I cannot change the xml source nor the expressions because they're out of my control. Good to know about the xpath 2.0 default namespace support, but this issue with xpath 1 is a serious limitation. And again, the xpath expressions and xml are out of my control. >> The xpath dom spec clearly left out this use case after specifing that >> the >> result of passing null or the empty string to lookupNamespaceURI should >> be >> undefined. How would then one query the default namespace ? > > I am not sure doing that would make much sense, but you can simply give > it a prefix, use that prefix in the expression, and have your resolver > properly resolve it (besides, I am not sure which default namespace you > are looking at, there may be one for every element in a document). > >> If there's a nsresolver, then node names without prefix in the >> expression >> are in the namespace returned by loopupNamespaceURI with a null or empty >> string parameter. This would be backwards compatible with the current >> spec, because applications currently do not passed empty string or nulls >> to loopupNamespaceURI, so this would be an harmless extension. > > We might be making such changes to accomodate XPath 2.0 which has a > notion of a default namespace for an expression, but I don't see why > this would make sense to accomodate your issue.
Received on Thursday, 11 October 2007 17:53:01 UTC