> > > It will never work correctly for option 1. Namespaces in SAX was a 2.6 > thing > > > (SAX2). > > > > Right, but namespaces just need to work as good as they did in PHP4, we > > can't lose that compatibility. If it works better - bonus. > > So what exactly is broken then in comparison to PHP4? From the size of the > patch and everything that was replaced, I was assuming quite a bit. And > looking at some of the functions added (start_element_ns, etc...) - those > are all SAX2 things. Are these needed to get it all working correctly or > were those just additional features? If that is the case, then I would > definitely agree fixing it for 2.5 is the way to go and not implement the > additional features - Arent we in a feature freeze anyways :) >
(*) I don't think any of that is actually broken with comparison to PHP4 - I think all that breaks in PHP4 too. PHP4 uses the prefix with namespaces as does PHP5, all these problems are inherent with using namespace prefixes. The default namespace problem may not exist with PHP4 (haven't tried it), but I assume the other problem must. Even if PHP4 did it wrong in ext/xml, we shouldn't actively violate PHP4's compatibility. This is not like domxml which was never stable, we shouldn't break compat, even if we are doing the right thing. -Sterling (*) Wrap the first paragraph with 'As Far As I know,' I haven't tested this. -- PHP CVS Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
