[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: com.sun,xml.parser LexicalEventListener improvements
Actually, that was for the context of the SAX2 discussions ... there's a thread I need to read (I was out on vacation while it was happening!) at http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/9903/0580.html The API mentioned below was essentially an earlier version of the proposal noted above. I expect that that the standard extension will follow SAX2 ... although I could get surprised on either front. So let me re-cast the question: should the SAX2 LexicalHandler stuff work as suggested below? - Dave Peter Wilson wrote: > > I believe that the class LexicalEventListener is the proposed basis for > the new javax.xml extension. In private conversation with Dave Brownwell > of Sun Microsystems I made the suggestions below. While refusing these > ideas Dave suggested that I poll the users on XML-DEV to determine their > reactions. I hope you will agree with these suggestions and contact Dave > > via xml-feedback@j.... > > 1. The startElement() method should indicate if it is an empty element. > i.e. whether the element ends with a /> tag or not. > > 2. The proposed LexicalEventListenser interface should have new methods > startPCDATA() and endPCDATA(). Calls to these methods would bracket > calls to the current characters(...) method. The LexicalEventListener > interface already contains bracketing calls for start/endCDATA - why the > inconsistency? > > <ALTERNATIVE> > Better yet, the characters(..) method should be split into two: > CDATA(...) and PCDATA(..). The two method sets would then be > startPCDATA(), PCDATA()*, endPCDATA. ditto for CDATA. > </ALTERNATIVE> > > <ALTERNATIVE> > Alternatively a single set: startCharacters(), characters(), > endCharacters() > could be used with a flag on startCharacters to indicate parsed or > unparsed text. > </ALTERNATIVE> > > Dave argues that these method calls may be implemented by writing an > event filter to restructure the events as required. By this logic, > current extensions to LexicalEventListener are all equally pointless. > Was the addition of the start/endCDATA methods added solely for his > convenience in implementing XMLDocumentBuilder? Using the same argument > they should not be cluttering up the new interface. > > My argument is that the new XML parsing facilities should not be skewed > by the need of one application (e.g. building Dom models). This is best > achieved by structuring lexical events for ALL syntactic structures. > The current LexicalEventListener interface is a step in the right > direction but is not complete. > > Peter Wilson > 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...)
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|