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

Re: SAX: Error Reporting (question 4 of 10)

• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Sun, 04 Jan 1998 10:10:56 -0800

At 12:50 PM 03/01/98 -0500, David Megginson wrote:
>  public void warning (String message, String systemID, int line);
>  public void fatalError (String message, String systemID, int line);

On this one, I agree with David and disagree with James.  I don't
see the advantages to using an exception.  I think that a SAX processor
should use fatal() (why the longer fatalError()?) - this has the
advantage that you can, after the first message, go on looking for
more fatal errors.  Of course, a SAX processor must not, after the first 
fatal() callback, emit any more element() or charData() callbacks.

I also think we should add a lineOffset argument, as someone
suggested; but I don't think that SAX should *require* processors
to do entity/line/offset tracking, since it's hard; SAX should
specify that a value of -1 for any of these arguments means the
processor doesn't know. -Tim


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...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: SAX: Error Reporting (question 4 of 10)
    • From: David Megginson <ak117@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: SAX: Whitespace Handling (question 5 of 10)
• Next by Date: Re: SAX: Processing Instructions (question 6 of 10)
• Previous by thread: Re: SAX: Error Reporting (question 4 of 10)
• Next by thread: Re: SAX: Error Reporting (question 4 of 10)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread