ModSax Suggestion

[MikeDacon at aol.com]

In a message dated 3/6/99 4:03:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, b.laforge at jxml.com
writes:
> Seems like a good fit for filters--drop what you don't
>  want, transform the rest as needed.
>  

I think Bill has brought up an excellent point.  In fact, I like that
suggestion better than my setFeature() method.  It seems to me
that the central tension of API design is whether to expand the
API or relegate functionality to be handled by a higher-level layer
of software.

In my original suggestion, on getting access to a DOM it seems
appropriate that be part of SAX (a low-layer) while transforming
the resultant tree be relegated to a higher level layer.

While I have certainly written gobs of enterprise level software, 
my experience with formal APIs is limited -- does this track with
those of you with more API building experience?

Best wishes,

 - Mike

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)