commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bugzi...@apache.org
Subject DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32360] - [jxpath] Default Namespace not handled correctly
Date Mon, 31 Oct 2005 15:48:24 GMT
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32360>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32360





------- Additional Comments From runger@cim.mcgill.ca  2005-10-31 16:48 -------
The spec should be fully and correctly implemented, yes.
But to go beyond the spec is also fine, provided it is not the default
behaviour. There are many areas where the spec is unspecific ("implementation
dependant"), and other areas where it is insufficient. Not to react to these
deficiencies simply because they aren't in the spec is just dogmatic.
After all, we are here to create useful software, not to blindly implement
specs. The specs are created by fallible people like you and me, not by god.

The cases I present here are limited because they are designed for maximal
simplicity, to get a point across, however I do try to consider more complicated
cases when I think about the problems.

I do not see the examples you give as being a hindrance in any way. The handling
is just the same as it was. The only difference is whether I allow 'null' to
take part in my mapping or not.

To answer specifically:

1) This is handled the same way as always. Introducing the ability to map the
null prefix to a namespace does not in any way change how the mappings are
handled. Whether I had unprefixed attributes mixed in the same expression with:
a) namespace-qualified 'foo'-prefixed elements
b) namespace-qualified null-prefixed elements
IS THE SAME! It's just a matter of treating 'null' as a type of prefix.

2) A document CANNOT have 2 default namespaces. The default namespace, by
definition, is singular. I assume you are talking about the 'default' (null)
prefix. The default prefix might be bound differently on different elements, but
this is why one introduces mappings in the first place. 
It is true that it is only possible to map a given prefix (including the default
prefix) once for a given XPath expression, but I don't see this as a big
limitation (its hard to see how it could work any other way), and certainly in
no way incompatible with my suggestions.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message