axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Wes Moulder" <...@themindelectric.com>
Subject RE: [jsr110-eg-disc] QName (COMMITTERS PLEASE READ)
Date Thu, 20 Jun 2002 17:13:54 GMT
Sam,
Since you're not 1.0, and theoretically people shouldn't be relying on
this behaviour in your implementation, the answer is, there's no
compelling reason to support it, but it's a nice to have in case anyone
actually was relying on it.
I just piped up because I thought it was an "obvious" alternative, and
works out better in that the localPart wouldn't end up in an illegal
state through attempting to use the old Axis form.

--Wes

-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Ruby [mailto:rubys@us.ibm.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 12:10 PM
To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: [jsr110-eg-disc] QName (COMMITTERS PLEASE READ)

Wes Moulder wrote:

> Ya'll might not like me stepping in here, but I have two questions 
> about this:
>

Hi Wes! You are always welcome here.

> a) isn't a local part of "one:two" illegal?
>

I would think so...

> b) Why not make your QName do both from the valueOf() method?
>

I'm a bit concerned about how code that depended on this feature would 
react if, some how, another implementation of this interface were to be 
picked up in the classpath. Is there a compelling need to support this 
other syntax?

> It should be trivially easy to figure out which one of the two forms 
> the string is in, and since a : is illegal in an NCName (what the 
> localpart is defined as), it shouldn't be difficult to figure out 
> which form it's in.
>

I agree that technically it would not be difficult.

- Sam Ruby


Mime
View raw message