om> cc: (bcc: David N Bertoni/CAM/Lotus)
Subject: Re: comments outside root
> At 7:20 PM 3/26/2001, Chris Hill wrote:
>> I don't think comments are even exposed via SAX events, so this would not
>> be an issue. There is no SAX comment event to suppress. Or is there?
Comments are exposed via LexicalHandler in SAX. Xerces-C++ 1.4 does
implement LexicalHandler.
> When you speak of better performance, are you
> referring to the extra function call to the
> advanced handler?
The SAX API is just generally higher overhead than the internal interface,
because it requires that the SAXParser handle the internal event callbacks,
then just turn around and pass
At 05:21 PM 3/26/2001, Dean Roddey wrote:
>I think that this is a SAX convention, which is why the suppression was
>added. If the SAX spec says that such events won't show up, we can't send
>them because it could seriously freak out applications written to the SAX
>spec.
I don't think comments ar
My guess is that comments slipped through the cracks.
Processing instructions (PIs) were originally (Xerces 1.2?)
ignored outside of the root element, but after some pestering
I got the code changed to make sure this wasn't so (since I
really wanted to use a PI before the root element.
I think D
I think that this is a SAX convention, which is why the suppression was
added. If the SAX spec says that such events won't show up, we can't send
them because it could seriously freak out applications written to the SAX
spec.
We could argue that the advanced handler, since its already outside of
