Neil Graham wrote:
Folks want to get access to encoding information by some (more or less)
standard SAX means; this is clearly the best we can do for them.
getVersion() is similar; by the same argument that's leading us to add
getEncoding to XMLLocator, I wonder whether we shouldn't add getVersion()
as well?
No, I don't think that's the right place for that
information.
Yeah, I hear you. I wonder how many XMLDTDHandler implementations there
are out there though?
You never hear about who's using it until we break
it and then people come out of the woodwork yelling
about how we broke it. But besides the people we don't
know about, *I* am one of the implementors of this
interface and I've already had to stand on my head
for all the other breaking changes we made to XNI. I
really don't want to go through that again.
slightly. Finally, I'd submit that it's trivial to implement the SAX
I don't think so.
Trust me; it is. Though you're right in pointing out the XMLLocator
addition is even more trivial. :)
I think you're replying to the wrong thing. I wasn't
saying "I don't think so" in regards to the trivialness
to implement in SAX. I was referring to your claim that
it'll cause an impact on performance. (Please disregard
if that's what you meant all along, but I get another
impression from what you've quoted in your response.)
couple of days unless I hear arguments to the contrary. If anyone wants
getVersion() added, let me know and I can do that in passing.
Again... No. I don't think we should be adding getVersion,
getStandalone or anything else not related to the parsed
stream itself.
--
Andy Clark * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
