xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: XOM API for Processing XML with Java
List archive
Re: [XOM-interest] Preserving base URIs on detachment
- From: "Bradley S. Huffman" <hip AT cs.okstate.edu>
- To: jcowan AT reutershealth.com
- Cc: xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [XOM-interest] Preserving base URIs on detachment
- Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 14:50:40 -0600
jcowan AT reutershealth.com writes:
> Elliotte Rusty Harold scripsit:
>
> > That's not going to happen. Wrong side of 80/20. Excessively
> > configurable APIs are confusing, hard to learn, and hard to use. I
> > will pick one approach or the other. Anyone who needs the alternative
> > behavior can simply call setBaseURI after detaching the node. The
> > question is what's the more sensible default.
>
> In that case, the sensible default is to freeze the base URI on detaching
> (any kind of detaching, including removeChild and replaceChild).
> Having the base URI right is potentially essential to getting the
> semantics of its character content and attribute values correct.
What if you don't detach or remove a element, but remove the base attribute
from it (assuming it was loaded with one). That can effect the base URI of
not only the element, but all it's descendants. Should the base URI be
frozen then?
Brad
-
Re: [XOM-interest] Preserving base URIs on detachment,
Grant Wood, 03/26/2004
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
-
Re: [XOM-interest] Preserving base URIs on detachment,
Elliotte Rusty Harold, 03/26/2004
-
Re: [XOM-interest] Preserving base URIs on detachment,
jcowan, 03/26/2004
-
Re: [XOM-interest] Preserving base URIs on detachment,
Bradley S. Huffman, 03/26/2004
- Re: [XOM-interest] Preserving base URIs on detachment, Elliotte Rusty Harold, 03/26/2004
- Re: [XOM-interest] Preserving base URIs on detachment, Elliotte Rusty Harold, 03/26/2004
-
Re: [XOM-interest] Preserving base URIs on detachment,
Bradley S. Huffman, 03/26/2004
-
Re: [XOM-interest] Preserving base URIs on detachment,
jcowan, 03/26/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.