[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Elements-Attributes-Data (was RE: SAX2 RFD: LexicalHandler draft v.1

• From: David Brownell <db@e...>
• To: David Megginson <david@m...>
• Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 10:42:52 -0800

David Megginson wrote:
> 
> Actually, apps need to know about error messages too, but that wrecks
> the litany.  Everything else should be taken care of invisibly by the
> parser.

public abstract void repeatTillDone (Elements, Attributes, Data)
	throws SAXException;

:-)


Speaking of which, and surely a rats nest but one that's worth at
least bringing up:  does anyone think there is more to be standardized
in the area of exceptions/diagnostics than just the warning/error/fatal
distinction we have now?

To elaborate a bit:  normally, one wants to catch exceptions and
recover from them to some degree.  Different exception, different
recovery -- if the peer closed the socket cleanly, there's probably
been no error, but other sorts of I/O exceptions are trouble.  There
might be such issues with XML too; probably will be, over time.

I can't think of any such issues related to parsing XML, at least
right now I can't, but I'd like to know if anyone else has any.

- Dave

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...)

• Prev by Date: XML is broken (was Re: Why Doesn't IE5 use the DTD to Validate?)
• Next by Date: Re: IE5.0 does not conform to RFC2376
• Previous by thread: XML is broken (was Re: Why Doesn't IE5 use the DTD to Validate?)
• Next by thread: Re: IE5.0 does not conform to RFC2376
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread