SAX/C++ vs. SAX2
lauren at sqwest.bc.ca
Fri Dec 3 19:57:27 GMT 1999
On 3 Dec 99, at 11:32, Tim Bray wrote:
> At 01:21 PM 12/3/99 -0500, David Megginson wrote:
> >1. To get some kind of standard Namespace support (or at least a way
> > to tell whether a parser has Namespace support built in).
> >2. To query parser features in general.
> >3. To get at the stuff that SAX 1.0 doesn't report, like comments,
> > CDATA boundaries, and DTD declarations.
> >I think that there is a real need for #1
> >I think that #2 would make life a fair bit easier for library developers
> >I have a lot of trouble with #3
> Agreed, on all points. The unavailability of namespaces threatens
> to make SAX unusable before too long. -Tim
I think SAX availability of namespaces would be useful; the DOM
Level 2 (soon to be a Candidate Recommendation, which means
"please implement and tell us whether it's possible") has
namespace support and the proliferation of SAX to DOM builders
means it would be good if SAX and DOM could support more of
what the other needs.
I have mixed feelings about CDATA sections; they're useful for
things like writing scripts that are embedded in XML documents, so
I'd rather have them available, but I can see that not every
application needs them.
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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, 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