Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: David Megginson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: "XML Developers' List" <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 10:12:39 -0500 (EST)
> 1. I still strongly urge not to use a URI for a feature or infoID.
> These are not resource locations they are just a descriptive
> string. In fact, I bet that most parsers just implement your
> initial recommended set.
Yes, but what about filters that perform specialised actions? And
what about adding support (stable or experimental) for new XML-related
features like schemas, datatyping, and linking as they become
The problem with SAX 1.0 is that it froze the XML status quo of about
a year ago, and many interesting things have happened since then; with
ModSAX, I'd like to leave the API open for two reasons:
1. so that we can extend it without breaking existing implementations;
2. so that people can experiment with different ways of supporting new
features within the SAX framework.
As I wrote before, it doesn't much matter whether we use Java property
names incorporating domain names (like
'org.xml.sax.features.validation') or URIs (like
'http://xml.org/sax/features/validation'), as long as we have the
ability for people to create new names without fear of collision.
All the best,
David Megginson firstname.lastname@example.org
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)