[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: David Megginson <david@megginson.com>
- To: xml-dev@xml.org
- Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 07:09:04 -0500 (EST)
Stefan Haustein writes:
> I agree that Miles' proposal could be put into a separate (sax
> independent) package, in principle, but without putting it into
> SAX2 core, parser vendors would not be forced to supply the parser
> vendor file, so it would be useless...
I don't want to force them to provide that, though -- SAX is already
hard enough for implementors to get right without adding another
hurdle. If there's as big a demand as you and Miles believe, then
market pressure will convince implementors to include the
configuration file anyway, and if not, then we've saved implementors
some unnecessary work.
One of the keys to SAX1's success was making life easy for
implementors, even when it meant leaving out features that some users
would have liked.
All the best,
David
p.s. I prefer to talk about implementors rather than vendors, since
not all parsers are maintained by commercial entities.
--
David Megginson david@megginson.com
http://www.megginson.com/
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/threads.html
***************************************************************************
|
