Re: [xml-dev] SAX/Java Proposed Changes

At 6:32 PM +0100 3/7/04, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:

>I am sorry, but I disagree. I have a lot of code depending on the
>assumption that the invocation of endDocument() indicates that no
>errors have been reported.


Then your code will break when used with some of today's parsers 
which do call endDocument() after a fatal error.. :-(

>In particular, I see no reason for forcing endDocument(). The
>parser application has all information that it requires, because
>the simple fact that the parser returns from XMLReader.parse()
>(either via return or by throwing an exception) indicates the
>same information.
>

It's a question of where you have that information. It's often 
convenient to know the document has ended inside the ContentHandler. 
Not that you can't have the method that calls parse() then call 
endDocument() inside the ContentHandler, but it's ugly, hard to 
explain, and error prone.

>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.
-- 

   Elliotte Rusty Harold
   [email protected]
   Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
   http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml
   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click
_______________________________________________
List: sax-devel, [email protected]
See:  http://www.saxproject.org/
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sax-devel