Andy Clark wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, there are currently features in DOM that are
> not possible to build via SAX2 callbacks. And I would guess
> that this separation will only increase over time as the
> various DOM specifications are developed.
> [...]
Point :) A good one...
Agreed
Pierpaolo Fumagalli wrote:
> Since with SAX 2.0 we'll be able to fully build a DOM, what about
> "dropping" the current DOMParser and SAXParser, keeping just one of them
> (the SAX one) and relying on a SAX-to-DOM to get the documents?
> I don't know how DOM level 2 and 3 would fit in this picture,
Ralf Pfeiffer wrote:
>
> Pier,
> Do you know about our SAX2DOM and DOM2SAX adapter beans which is part of the
> XPK4J on AlphaWorks (recently deprecated)?
Yes, but I can't use them (Licensing stuff) and since they were s
easy, I just wrote them myself (my classes also take a bunch of SAX
eve
Pier,
Do you know about our SAX2DOM and DOM2SAX adapter beans which is part of the
XPK4J on AlphaWorks (recently deprecated)?
-rip
Pierpaolo Fumagalli wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > -0.7
> >
> > I would only state that this will obviously make a difference in
> > performance in large d
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> -0.7
>
> I would only state that this will obviously make a difference in
> performance in large documents, since every trip out of the parser now goes
> through twice as many calls along the way, with both sets being
> indirections via a pointer. For that reason I pe
L PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: Re: SAX2 and DOM...
Pierpaolo Fumagalli wrote:
>
> Since with SAX 2.0 we'll be able to fully build a DOM, what about
> "dropping" the current DOMParser and SAXParser, keeping just one of them
> (the SAX one) and relyin
Paul Prescod wrote:
>
> Pierpaolo Fumagalli wrote:
> >
>
> > Since with SAX 2.0 we'll be able to fully build a DOM, what about
> > "dropping" the current DOMParser and SAXParser, keeping just one of them
> > (the SAX one) and relying on a SAX-to-DOM to get the documents?
>
> I strongly support t
Pierpaolo Fumagalli wrote:
>
> Since with SAX 2.0 we'll be able to fully build a DOM, what about
> "dropping" the current DOMParser and SAXParser, keeping just one of them
> (the SAX one) and relying on a SAX-to-DOM to get the documents?
I strongly support this idea. It will be useful to be able
I have an idea...
I already have some classes doing SAX-to-DOM translation, and
I'm currently in the process of bringing them from SAX version 1 to
version 2.
Since with SAX 2.0 we'll be able to fully build a DOM, what about
"dropping" the current DOMParser and SAXParser, keeping just one o
