xml-dev - Re: ANN: SAX 2.0 extension proposals.

[David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>]

David Megginson wrote:
> 
> David Brownell writes:
> 
>  > If you care about which parser you get, then ask for it.  Else
>  > you asked for a default, and you got one.  Anyone who can control
>  > a system property can do the same to a class path, but the converse
>  > isn't true.  Software setting up a controlled environment for running
>  > components (a preferred model) will assemble it at runtime using
>  > class loader primitives and such, but can't set system properties
>  > differently.
> 
> So what you want, I think, is simply a statement to the effect that
> it's OK to build your own XMLReaderFactory with the same class name
> and shadow the existing one?

I want the "get the default parser" factory methods to permit using
environment-specific intelligence, rather than to preclude it as you
now do.  (I'm not sure what you mean by "shadow".)

That's "just" a specification change, not a syntax change.


>	  I don't see any harm, but is that the
> kind of thing that needs to be mentioned explicitly?

Yes and no.

Yes, since the specification should work in environments other than the
"run from commandline" context you appear to be assuming.

No, since anyone's free to modify a "public domain" specification to
do whatever they darn well please.

I'd far rather see _your_ version of SAX2 address such problems than
need to take advantage of the latter option.

- Dave

***************************************************************************
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/
***************************************************************************