RE: [wsrp-interop] namespacePrefix format

Nate,

 

That sounds good to me.

 

Nader

 

From: Nathan Lipke [mailto:] 

Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 4:49
PM

To: Nader
 Oteifa

Cc:


Subject: Re: [wsrp-interop]
namespacePrefix format

 

I added this to the interop wiki (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/wsrp/WSRP_Interop_Discussions?action=show
number 13) and we should discuss it on the next call.

Nate

Nader Oteifa wrote: 

Unless I’m misunderstanding you, I would hope so. 
Are you suggesting just the namespace by itself (e.g. to use as global var or
function object name) or the resulting namespaced token?

 

I would presume the namespace prefix
should be compliant with the scripting language(s) that apply to the mime type
supported/requested by the consumer.  

 

We found that starting a namespace prefix
with an underscore “_” creates invalid CSS class names.  The
most common namespace prefix form we’ve seen is essentially an initial
character or two followed by a GUID.  Example (Vignette):

 

<form
name="V_72b9e63f71a993c0c9b9a610aa40d0a0_TestForm" …

 

To me, starting with a letter followed by
alpha numeric and minimizing underscores is probably safest.

 

Nader

 

From: Nathan Lipke [mailto:]

Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008
3:24 PM

To: 

Subject: [wsrp-interop]
namespacePrefix format

 

The WSRP spec implies that the namespace prefix can be
used for things like Javascript and tag ids. However, it does not specify any
format (e.g. must start with letter or '_' followed by letters, digits and
'_').  

A303 [Flexibility]: 

WSIA Web Services should not be precluded from using
scripting elements within Presentation Fragments. In particular, this
specification should support Presentation Fragments that contain JavaScript
scripts. 

Is the intent of the spec that the namespace prefix is javascript compliant? If
not, is there any assumptions that can be made about the value of namespace
prefix?

Thanks,

Nate