Re: Docs back under control (was Re: Another doc issue)

David Megginson wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 07:37:34 -0500, Elliotte Harold
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
>>OK. I looked at it again and there is a conflict. On
>>http://sax.sourceforge.net/?selected=namespaces we find
> 
> 
> [snip\
> 
> 
>>I think these sentences in
>>http://sax.sourceforge.net/?selected=namespaces should simply be
>>deleted. I don't think they're reliable or accurate. The empty string
>>could mean namespace processing is not being performed, or it could mean
>>the namespace URI is the empty string. I suspect at one point in the
>>past. somebody was planning on the empty string only being used when
>>namespace processing is performed but this is not the case now.
> 

We have some discussion in the SAX for .NET mailing list
about null vs. empty strings parameters. I noticed that in most
cases the original Java SAX API specifies that one must
pass null for the absence of a string argument (mostly
when PublicId or SystemId URIs are passed). However,
namespace URI and prefix arguments are treated differently,
their absence is indicated by passing an empty string.

What is the intention behind these differences?

So far our discussion has centered around the programming
convenience of the empty string vs. the correctness of null.

Karl


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. 
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/
_______________________________________________
List: sax-devel, [email protected]
See:  http://www.saxproject.org/
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sax-devel