Why SAX needs namespace support

[Dan Brickley]

On Wed, 27 Jan 1999 david at megginson.com wrote:

> Michael.Kay at icl.com writes:
 
>  > >  > Perhaps a setOption(option, flag) interface would be more 
>  > > extensible.
>  > > 
>  > > I could live with this, but only if the options were namespace
>  > > qualified, i.e.
>  > > 
>  > >   parser.setOption("http://xml.org/sax/features/validation", true);
>  > >   parser.setOption("http://xml.org/sax/features/namespaces", false);
>  > >   
>  > I'm all for fully qualified names, but I don't see why we should repeat the
>  > error of using "http://" names for things that are not accessible via the
>  > HTTP protocol. What's wrong with
>  > "org.xml.sax.option.validation"?
> 
> That's fine for Java, but since it's based on DNS anyway, why develop
> a general solution that uses a slightly different notation?

Yep. Why not just say that these properties are identified with URIs and
leave it at that? http: URLs could then happily co-exist with URNs,
uuid URLs etc etc without changing the basic architecture.

URI ref: 
Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax; Berners-Lee,
Fielding, Masinter, Internet Draft Standard August, 1998; RFC2396. 
(available from http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2396.txt)

Dan


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)