db at Eng.Sun.COM
Tue Nov 17 19:26:57 GMT 1998
david at megginson.com wrote:
> > I think we can manage compatibility as follows:
> > - We design 2.0 so that an application that conforms to SAX 1.0 also
> > conforms to SAX 2.0
> > - A standard wrapper round a SAX 1.0 parser should enable it to conform to
> > SAX 2.0, providing null/default implementations of the new features where
> > necessary. (E.g. the response to the question "are you a validating parser?"
> > is "maybe").
> Yes, but how do we accomplish this? Do we invent a new package name
> for SAX 1.0.1 to avoid collision?
At least for Java, there are rules (in the Java Language Specification
as I recall) defining how to do compatible evolution of interfaces.
Defining a new package name isn't necessary, but it can make the API
look and act a lot cleaner.
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)
More information about the Xml-dev