Lists Home |
Date Index |
> Pretty limited view. I wrote a SAX parser about 2 months ago using the
> namespace XmlAdvice.Xml.Sax, and it is going to appear soon within an
> article that I wrote and as part of a download. And as for precedence,
> Wahlin put one in his book (one of the most popular regarding XML and
> about 2 1/2 years ago, using the namespace XmlParsers.Sax. IIRC, there
> a download on another web site that showed how simple it was to write a
> parser given that the majority of the work was already afforded via the
> System.Xml.XmlTextReader, that one was available during the first beta of
Right. We are obviously not trying to exclude anybody or ignore anyone's
work in the area. And I am aware that you and Dan and others have written
articles in the space. Unfortunately none of this code was (is) widely
available for comment and revision when we began this project last year. It
is valuable to the community and the code itself is useful-- But I can't
exactly write a new fully featured parser around it, unless I make the
changes-- in which case I would need and store the results somewhere else.
Like for example, extension interfaces or input sources, they are not
included in Dan's code . Also, I am not sure how the licensing works with
I am eager to see your work as well-- I haven't seen anything about it
published on your blog-- and I can't find any links through Google-- though
I did see a couple of articles on SAMs site, they didn't seem related.
Perhaps if it is as yet unreleased we could get together with Karl and
incorporate your ideas.
> I agree with Dare that only proper members of the FCL should include the
> System namespace. Look at the numerous other samples out on the web that
> avoided using "System" for the root of the namespace name that are not
> affiliated with a company.
Right, this is beginning to sound like a consensus is building-- was there
another name that you preferred out of the ones mentioned?
All the best,