[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: SAX2 ... missing features?
- From: "Simon St.Laurent" <email@example.com>
- To: David Brownell <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:59:31 -0400
On 12 Jul 2001 13:48:48 -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> > I'm not sure I see missing features per se in SAX. Given my druthers,
> > I'd refactor some aspects of it, but none of that is really worth
> > pursuing at this point.
> Though I think I did identify a few "missing properties" it'd be worth
Certainly! The things I'd change would involve substantial
modifications that probably aren't worth making for most users.
> > On the other hand, I'd love to see something along the lines of a SAX
> > standard library. David Megginson's published an XMLWriter and a
> > DataWriter and a fair number of SAX-based tools, but there are lots of
> > possibilities which could be really useful.
> These do beg the issue of which ones should be "standard", of course.
> It may be awkward to define a "standard". Perhaps what's needed is
> more like a clearing house, or "collective works".
Yep. I'd like to see some place for these to find a home, and maybe
accrete into a library. I'm aware of implementation of several of the
pieces I listed in particular projects, though they aren't available
separately or as open source.
Basically, I'd like to see more freely available tinkertoys for use with
SAX. That can happen over time as various authors contribute or
instantly if someone gets the urge to write and publish these bits.
> I like the "XML Pipeline" framework I developed, for example, in no
> small part because it doesn't ignore lexical and declaration handlers.
> Which means that it supports more complete "pass through", unlike
> anything based directly on XMLFilterImpl. (So my XMLWriter is
> able to record the DTD information when it matters...)
That sounds more useful to me. Is the only required change [extends
XMLPipelineImpl] instead of [extends XMLFilterImpl]?