- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 14:26:15 +0300
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>, public-cdf@w3.org
On Oct 10, 2007, at 23:48, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > * Henri Sivonen wrote: >> DOM doesn't capture the namespace mapping scope at the node creation >> time. It doesn't even provide API-native convenience methods for >> resolving qNames-in-content into NS,localName pairs. Even if you >> bother to walk the tree using code you wrote yourself because DOM >> didn't do it for you, the meaning of qNames is brittle when nodes are >> moved around. When you walk towards the root you may find very >> different ns declarations if the node you start from has been moved >> to another subtree after the initial DOM build. > > I have a hard time following your criticism. It is true that the > DOM is > unaware of possible dependencies between some content and its context, > and moving nodes without reconstructing the context may have > undesirable > or unexpected effects. This is true for most inherited declarations > and > relative references (the language of the node may change due to > xml:lang > attributes, resource identifiers may change due to xml:base > attributes, > event handlers may behave differently because the node's parent > changed, > "QNames" may resolve to different names due to xmlns attributes, etc.) > > That's a rather general problem, and beyond that, I am not sure > what you > are saying. It is a general problem for anything that is specified to inherit along the tree and isn't captured in the node at the node creation time. That xml:lang is brittle doesn't make qNames in content less brittle. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Friday, 12 October 2007 11:26:38 UTC