Re: [domxml] namespaces / exception / extensionname

At 12:20 18.04.2003, Christian Stocker wrote:

- Namespaces: Should we use a "domxml" [...] - Extension Name: It looks like domxml5 will be more or less completely uncompatible to domxml4, [...]. Furthermore, domxml is a very misleading name for the whole extension. domxml is not only about DOM stuff, since a long time. It has support for XSLT, XPath, Validation, XInclude, etc... Furthermore libxml2 would allow for implementing more XML stuff like XML Schema/relaxng Validation, SAX, XMLTextReader Interface etc... Therefore IMHO a more generic name would be a "Good Thing".

I think we should keep the old domxml extension util the new one is stable enough. Then i agree to the naming change and i thing the extension should use a namespace (the same as the extension name) to prevent name conflicts with classes that might already exist in userland. Since namespaces are new to PHP5/ZE2 and noone could use such already i guess it is a good thing to have every oo extension doing so. If one doesn't like namespaces he could easily do "import" and that's it. For the new name of the extension: what about w3xml? To reflect it implements most important xml related w3 standards? regards marcus