Re: Making SimpleXML more useful

----- Original Message ----- > Looking at this in more detail...I don't think there's a bug here, or > a > patch required. ... > > problem for me, as I have an XML schema that specifies that the > > child > > elements must not namespace qualified. > Is this possible in an XML schema? I don't know much about schemas, > but ... Absolutely, if the XML schema has the "elementFormDefault" attribute set to "unqualified", the child elements must be unqualified. > I would also expect, if the child were to be namespaced, that these > are > equivalent: > <ns1:parent xmlns="whatever" xmlns:ns1="whatever"> > <child>abc</child> > </ns1:parent> > <ns1:parent xmlns:ns1="whatever"> > <ns1:child>abc</ns1:child> > </ns1:parent> ... In the first case, the <child> element is unqualified, and in the second, it is not. They are not the same thing, either semantically or otherwise. > and the xmlns="" is necessary. If this functionality were removed, > how > could this be done? For what? In the spec (http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names/#iri-use), it says: "The empty string, though it is a legal URI reference, cannot be used as a namespace name. " > Sure, SimpleXML could perhaps output XML that is slightly more > efficient/less verbose than it currently does, but its output is not > incorrect, and the functionality you want to remove is necessary in > other circumstances. I don't see how removing the ability to use "" as a namespace is an issue, since "" can't be used as a namespace name. > Ben. Tom