[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Mike Champion wrote:
> Are you (and Elliotte Harold?) saying that if the J2ME folks were to change
> the spec and allow DOCTYPE declarations, but not implement all the
> productions required to process an internal subset, then the J2ME "XML"
> processor would be much more suitable even if it is not a fully conformant
> XML 1.x implementation?
What may not be clear here is that JAXP is not itself a parser -- it's a
parser abstraction layer. If JAXP is explicitly disallowing some features
of XML, that means that no parser can implement those features as long as
that parser is accessed through the standard, parser-independent API.
This isn't just a non-conformant parser -- this is a platform's standard
API insisting that it absolutely will not work with a conformant parser
(if one were to be implemented).
If they allowed everything, even if their default implementation didn't
handle it properly, there's at least room for alternate implementations to
handle everything properly. (On the other hand, then you have differences
across implementations, which is what JAXP is trying to prevent, so you
might as well not even bother with JAXP, and just write
implementation-specific code.)
--
Mike Kozlowski
http://www.klio.org/mlk/
|
