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

Re: SAX/Java Proposed Changes

• To: XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>, SAX Developers' List <sax-devel@l...>
• Subject: Re: SAX/Java Proposed Changes
• From: David Megginson <dmeggin@a...>
• Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 07:22:38 -0500
• In-reply-to: <p06010203bc71316af8e7@[192.168.254.4]>
• References: <1078627030.23151.ezmlm@l...> <404B5CA1.7070000@i...> <p06010203bc71316af8e7@[192.168.254.4]>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040122 Debian/1.6-1

Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:

>> I wouldn't have a problem, if SAX had always specified this, but
>> it didn't.
> 
> One of the maintainers claims it did always specify this. One of the 
> maintainers claims it didn't. Honestly, this is a mess; and sooner or 
> later I think we should be pick one path or the other, but maybe not 
> quite yet.

Unfortunately, I don't claim that SAX ever specified this clearly.

My original intention was that endDocument would not be called in an error 
state, but I didn't write any docs to forbid doing so; David Brownell's 
intention, as far as I can tell, was that endDocument would always be called 
even in an error state, but he didn't remove my docs allowing it not to be 
called.

We do need to fix this problem, but we shouldn't do so gratuitously on a 
minor maintenance release, since it's obviously a major compatibility 
problem for both parsers and client code.  Again, I think that the most 
responsible thing to do is to flag the problem in the docs for both 
endDocument() and fatalError(), so that people won't end up with a 
(possibly-mistaken) assumption depending on which one they read first.


All the best,


David

• References:
  • Re: SAX/Java Proposed Changes
    • From: Jochen Wiedmann <joe@i...>
  • Re: SAX/Java Proposed Changes
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: SAX/Java Proposed Changes
• Next by Date: SAX Underspecifications
• Previous by thread: Re: SAX/Java Proposed Changes
• Next by thread: Re: SAX/Java Proposed Changes
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread