[XML-SIG] SAX Namespaces

[Greg Stein]

On Wed, Jul 05, 2000 at 05:52:35PM +0200, Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
>...
> #2a seems to me to be inferior to #1 at first glance.  The final qname
> in the outer tuple seems better off as a separate parameter than stuck
> inside that tuple.  Of course, this leaves the question of how we
> represent attributes.  In my opinion we could go for #1 and still use
> some variant of Paul's attribute lists.  The question is just which
> one:
> 
>   i)   [((URI, localname, qname), value), ...] 
>   ii)  [(((URI, localname), qname), value), ...] 
>   iii) [((URI, localname), qname, value), ...] 
>   iv)  {(URI, localname) : (qname, value), ...}
>   v)   ({(URI, localname) : value, ...}, {qname : (URI, localname), ...})
> 
> More ideas? Opinions? Does it really matter what we choose here, if we
> are going to have a convenience wrapper class anyway?

I say (iv)  [and qname is the prefix that was used]

Using (iv) means that the passed attribute dictionary is immediately usable.
The other forms require some initial processing, yet provide no value-add.

Please do not assume that a convenience class will always be used.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/