Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Why not permit the application to bind an instance to perform the respective
operations. It's more powerful and no harder to implement or to use?
david@m... wrote:
>
> Michael.Kay@i... writes:
>
> > Perhaps a setOption(option, flag) interface would be more extensible.
>
> I could live with this, but only if the options were namespace
> qualified, i.e.
>
> try {
> parser.setOption("http://xml.org/sax/features/validation", true);
> parser.setOption("http://xml.org/sax/features/namespaces", false);
> parser.setOption("http://xml.org/sax/features/entity-expansion", true);
> parser.setOption("http://simonstl.org/ns/sax/xlink", true);
> } catch (SAXUnsupportedFeatureException e) {
> System.err.println("This parser ain't up to snuff -- try another!");
> }
>
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...)
|
