Lists Home |
Date Index |
Bob Wyman wrote:
> Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> > I think you'll likely find massive opposition to such a thing, both
> > here and at saxproject.org.
> Amelia A. Lewis wrote:
> >Second the motion.
> Would this go down easier if rather than proposing a
> SAX 3, the proposal was to develop an extension to the SAX 2
> XMLReader interface and then use the standard feature and
> property facilities to allow callers to define which callback
> should be made when
> characters() would normally be called? This could be done
> without perturbing the core SAX 2 interfaces at all.
I have a very strong feeling that we should NOT try to change/extend SAX.
The most sensible thing to do is to implement SAX2 over BER and PER (using
schema information) in such a way that TEXT, and only TEXT, is presented to
The application should receive the same series of callbacks, with the same
parameters, regardless of whether PER, BER, or XML is being parsed. In
other words, the application should not be aware that PER or BER, rather
than XML, is being parsed (*). When writing, the application should not be
aware that PER or BER, rather than XML, is being produced (*).
This would enable us to use ASN.1 technologies and XML technologies together
easily. A "binary-enabled SAX", instead, wouldn't take us anywhere.
(*) except, perhaps, when initializing the parsing process or the writing