Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> "Chris S" wrote:
>
>> and while most users and the w3 spec
>> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315#NoNSPrefixRewriting)
>> agree this feature is actually a bug
>
> ET's not a canonicalization library, and doesn't claim to be one, so that
> reference isn't
> ver
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> That is not enough reason. Yes, it makes certain applications
> impossible, e.g. when namespace prefixes are inside attribute
> values. It just means you can't use it for that application,
> then. XML has many other applications, and so does ElementTree.
there are ways to
"Chris S" wrote:
> and while most users and the w3 spec
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315#NoNSPrefixRewriting)
> agree this feature is actually a bug
ET's not a canonicalization library, and doesn't claim to be one, so that
reference isn't
very relevant. And "most users" know t
Chris S schrieb:
> I'm happy to see Elementtree being considered for inclusion with 2.5.
> However, before committing to this decision, there's an issue
> regarding it's namespace parsing that should be addressed. Although
> Elmenttree is in most respects an excellent XML parser, a huge gotcha
> th
Chris Spencer writes:
> there's an issue
> regarding [ElementTree's] namespace parsing that should be addressed.
[... it performs namespace rewriting ...]
> while most users and the w3 spec
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315#NoNSPrefixRewriting)
> agree this feature is actually
