Announcement: SAX2 1999-06-01 alpha release for Java

[David Brownell]

John Cowan wrote:
> 
> [ re the dom-node property and where to start "parsing" Documents ]
> 
> > Why do you not like making that property (dom-node) be read/write,
> 
> Essentially because the value of getProperty("dom-node") is a Node,
> whereas the argument to setProperty("dom-node", doc) needs to be a
> Document. 

But a "Document" is a "Node", so there's no inconsistency.


>	 This is an ugly asymmetry, even though the compiler is
> unable to check the type.  Adding a new property
> ("dom-document") would be better,

I guess I don't see that either.  The value of the "dom-node"
property when the startDocument() call is made needs to be the
document; that's not an asymmetry.

Adding another property might be nice, but doesn't seem essential.
"Nice" only because you could see it when you weren't parsing.
But I've got something against adding too many interfaces; I've
found minimalist interfaces grow a lot more gracefully than the
other kind!


> > beyond that not being what you implemented already?
> 
> (heh heh)

Whoops -- I forgot my smiley!  :-)

- Dave

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 (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)