Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Peter Murray-Rust writes:
> I appreciate that for those constructing parsers, the question of
> where SAX-J sits w.r.t. DOM is important and possibly affects their
> ease in implementing SAX-J. And, of course, we must make it easy
> for parser writers, since if it isn't they won't play. From the
> *user*'s point of view, the interior of SAX-J is irrelevant :-)
Unfortunately, the question matters greatly for the _design_ of SAX-J:
if SAX-J has to provide enough information to build a level-one DOM,
it will have to deliver _all_ of the required information; if not,
then it can be somewhat simpler. (It is possible, of course, that
changes to the DOM's information set will then require future changes
to SAX-J, but changes to DOM terminology will not.)
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson ak117@f...
Microstar Software Ltd. dmeggins@m...
http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/dmeggins/
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
