Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On 12/18/2010 8:05 AM, Michael Kay wrote: > >> >> PS: probably everyone on this list is already aware of this, but SAX >> stands for Simple API for XML. To support MicroXML, we would want an >> even simpler one; Micro-API: MAX? uAX?. > > Have you tried XMLStreamWriter? As an event-based push API, it's a > delight to use compared to SAX, whether you're sending or receiving. As it turns out I only very recently implemented some xml-aware full-text indexing using woodstox; as you say, I was drawn to it because I needed a pull parser. So I worked with XMLStreamReader. It wasn't obvious to me how to use XmlStreamWriter as an event-base push API. I guess one could implement an event sink as an XmlStreamWriter, but then what? Is there some existing glue to connect a Reader to a Writer, or does one need to implement that? Also, to return to the point in my original post: it wasn't so much a criticism of SAX, as much as to say that folks working with a simplified document format might prefer to have a simplified API that isn't peppered with hooks for legacy (XML 1.0) features. But is it really worth the trouble to produce new micro- versions of all these XML APIs that would simply eliminate CDATA, DOCTYPE, namespaces, etc? Especially if namespaces are to be reintroduced later? -Mike
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
