Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ensure namespace pruning is not over zealous #1444

Conversation

bradleybeddoes
Copy link

Namespace pruning would previously consider the same namespace URI as
equivalent even though the prefix in use may have differed.

Thus child nodes added with a different prefix for an already known
namespace would cause the resulting document to become schema invalid.

Namespace pruning would previously consider the same namespace URI as
equivalent even though the prefix in use may have differed.

Thus child nodes added with a different prefix for an already known
namespace would cause the resulting document to become schema invalid.
@bradleybeddoes
Copy link
Author

@flavorjones any further thoughts on merging this or #1333 for the next 1.6.8 RC?

Any idea on timelines if so?

flavorjones added a commit that referenced this pull request May 30, 2016
and adding tests for reparented nodes' namespaces

related to #1332
flavorjones added a commit that referenced this pull request May 30, 2016
and adding test for matching parent's default ns

related to #1332
flavorjones added a commit that referenced this pull request May 30, 2016
@flavorjones flavorjones added this to the 1.6.8 milestone May 30, 2016
@flavorjones
Copy link
Member

I've merged some of your tests from this PR into master, and I've given you credit in the commit log.

Apologies I couldn't figure out a better way to keep your name on the commits.

Thank you so much!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants