[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Re: SAX is not a read-only API (wa RE: re: XML S
Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: > The behavior of the XMLReader implementation class is defined. The > behavior of the ContentHandler implementation is not. Along similar > lines, the SAX implementer provides the XMLReader implementation > class. A SAX implementer does not provide the ContentHandler > implementation. Nothing stops an XMLReader implementation from pulling information from a database and making it look like an XML Infoset to the consumer. If an implementation provides a ContentHandler class that serializes XML 1.0, would you still call it a read-only API? MSXML4 comes with one called MXXMLWriter and I'm pretty sure the Java impls with them today as well. Since nothing stops me from using SAX interfaces for generating Infosets, I think it's clearly an overstatement to say "SAX is read-only". It seems to me that the SAX interfaces were carefully designed to be symmetric for both read/write operations, which IMO actually complicates reading. I actually find ContentHandler to be quite intuitive for write operations but quite cumbersome for processing anything but trivial content models. Microsoft's .NET implementation separates the two, maintaining the SAX model for writing and a new pull-model interface for reading. -aaron ...................................................... . Aaron Skonnard, DevelopMentor (http://skonnard.com). . Essential XML Quick Reference available online! . . Download PDFs: http://www.develop.com/books . ......................................................
|
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
|