• From: John Cowan <cowan@l...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 16:02:05 -0500 (EST)

Bill la Forge scripsit:
> 
> Should we just stick with ModSAX/ModParser?
> Should we change to OpenSAX/OpenParser?

I support OpenSAX/Parser, in other words keeping the names of the
classes and interfaces the same, and changing the package name only.

-- 
John Cowan					cowan@c...
		e'osai ko sarji la lojban.

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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
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...)

• References:
  • Are we ready to resolve the Mod??SAX name?
    • From: "Bill la Forge" <b.laforge@j...>

• Prev by Date: Re: empty tags and the XMl 1.0 spec
• Next by Date: Re: Are we ready to resolve the Mod??SAX name?
• Previous by thread: Are we ready to resolve the Mod??SAX name?
• Next by thread: SAX: Name Vote
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread