ANNOUNCEMENT: Proposed SAX Revisions

David G. Durand dgd at
Fri Mar 20 19:40:05 GMT 1998

I read the revisions, and they're very sensible. But I have one deletion
request, and one addition request.

I don't believe the arguments about the uselessness of Doctype. Until this
proposal, I didn't see any reason to argue about it, however. Leave
Doctype in. Those who find it useless won't use it. It's sure not so
hard to implement that requiring it is a hardship on parser writers, so I
fail to see why it shouldn't be kept.

Please, please, please, allow me a way to find out if an element was
"empty". (i.e. written <e/>). I use this information when I write DTDs, and
intend to continue doing so. I also know, from the long discussions in the
XML-SIG that I am not alone in using this syntax to represent a distinction
that I want preserved and detectable by applications.

Probably the best way to handle this might be to have an extra flag argument
on the element end event (to indicate this element end was not present in
the document). This lets people who care about whether an element was empty
find out, without greatly inconveniencing people who want to follow the
simpler "every element is a container" model.

  -- David
David Durand                 dgd at| david at
Boston University Computer Science        | Dynamic Diagrams  |
                                          | MAPA: mapping for the WWW

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as:
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list