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

Re: Sun is forking SAX

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Sun is forking SAX
• From: ari@c... (K. Ari Krupnikov)
• Date: 20 Jul 2003 22:04:28 -0700
• In-reply-to: <p04330107bb405e04435e@[192.168.254.4]>
• References: <p04330107bb405e04435e@[192.168.254.4]>
• Sender: ari@l...
• User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2

Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...> writes:

> *   Sun is using the confusing, underspecified SAXParser and
> SAXParserFactory instead of the much cleaner, better specified
> XMLReader and XMLReaderFactory.
> 
> * Sun has removed the ContentHandler interface and replaced it with
> the DefaultHandler adapter class.

I agree that these are poor interfaces, but aren't these the ones that
the "full-size", j2SE JAXP specifies?

http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/api/javax/xml/parsers/package-frame.html
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/api/javax/xml/parsers/SAXParser.html

I think these APIs were a mistake to start with, and I never used
them directly - I always getXMLReader() and go from there.

This said, do you think it's a good idea to introduce
incompatibilities between Java platforms at the cost of better
interfaces in some of them? And then, is ME the right place to start?

Ari.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Sun is forking SAX
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• References:
  • Sun is forking SAX
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: the web client interface was RE: Two linkquestions
• Next by Date: ann: Ant task for Trang
• Previous by thread: Sun is forking SAX
• Next by thread: Re: Sun is forking SAX
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread