[cddlm] Re: CDL Testcase Presentation

[Steve Loughran]

Jun Tatemura wrote:
> Steve,
> Yes, you got a point. I would define a 'semantic equivalence' as just 
> considering
> elements, attributes, and nodes that can represent property values 
> (i.e., text nodes
> and CDATA section? )
> because the CDL spec does not say anything about how to treat other 
> types of nodes
> such as comment nodes (as you pointed out).
> 
> One thing I cannot decide is whether we should allow extra attributes 
> (except ones in
> the CDL namespace).  An example is xmlns:* attributes -- we may want to 
> let an implementation
> decide how (where) namespaces are specified and just want to care 
> equivalence of QNames.
> 

oh yes, namespaces should be ignored. I think that was probably implicit 
in the axis code as many dom-like object models treat NS declarations 
specially, not storing them as attributes but as NS declarations. I 
think Axis2 OM does this,

-steve