[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
- To: David Megginson <david@megginson.com>
- Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 08:37:57 +0700
David Megginson wrote:
> The parser may throw an exception for either of two reasons:
>
> 1. it cannot validation; or
>
> 2. it does not recognise the property.
>
> If the application wants to determine which of the two is the case,
> then it can try the following:
>
> try {
> parser.setFeature("http://xml.org/sax/features/validation", false);
> } catch (SAXNotSupportedException e) {
> // ...
> }
>
> If the parser throws an exception again, then it does not recognise
> the property name (in other words, it may or may not perform
> validation, and the application has no way to tell); if the parser
> does not throw and exception, then it simply does not support
> validation.
Wouldn't it be simpler to throw different type of exception in these two
cases? You could have a SAXNotRecognizedException that extends
SAXNotSupportedException, and say that parsers should throw
SAXNotRecognizedException when the reason they don't support a feature
is that they do not recognize the feature.
James
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|
