CVS Update: xmlpull-api-v1/doc

Aleksander Andrzej Slominski <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.text.xml.xmlpull.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
aslom       02/07/25 11:15:33

  Modified:    doc      faq.html
  Log:
  spelling minor chnages
  
  Revision  Changes    Path
  1.8       +6 -6      xmlpull-api-v1/doc/faq.html
  
  Index: faq.html
  ===================================================================
  RCS file: /l/extreme/cvspub/xmlpull-api-v1/doc/faq.html,v
  retrieving revision 1.7
  retrieving revision 1.8
  diff -u -b -t -w -r1.7 -r1.8
  --- faq.html	2002/07/25 15:28:27	1.7
  +++ faq.html	2002/07/25 16:15:33	1.8
  @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
   <BODY BGCOLOR="white">
   
   <H1>XMLPULL API FAQ</H2>
  -<pre>Version $Id: faq.html,v 1.7 2002/07/25 15:28:27 haustein Exp $</pre>
  +<pre>Version $Id: faq.html,v 1.8 2002/07/25 16:15:33 aslom Exp $</pre>
   
   
   <h2><a name="XML_COMP"></a>Is the XMLPULL API V1 compatible with XML 1.0?</h2>
  @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@
   However, this may not be possible for other than standard XML 1.0 
   representations of the XML&nbsp;infoset such as WBXML. But even when
   <a href="http://xmlpull.org/v1/doc/features.html#xml-roundtrip">XML ROUNDTRIP</a> 
  -feature is not enabled, round-tripping at XML-Infoset level can be acomplished 
  +feature is not enabled, round-tripping at XML-Infoset level can be accomplished 
   by using the 
   <a href="http://www.xmlpull.org/v1/doc/api/org/xmlpull/v1/XmlPullParser.html#nextToken()">
   nextToken()</a> method instead of next().
  @@ -208,12 +208,12 @@
   <p>This is currently not supported though one can always write custom method for 
   this purpose. For instance, one of internal JUnit tests shows an example how 
   to round-trip XML - this is used to test XMLPULL API. Also, a prototype of an
  -XmlSerializer inteface can already be obtained from the CVS repository. 
  +XmlSerializer interface can already be obtained from the CVS repository. 
   For details, please refer to the ongoing discussion on 
   the xmlpull-dev mailing list.<h2>
   
   
  -<a name="FACTORY_ABSTRACT"></a>Why is the PullParserFactory class not abstract?</h2>
  +<a name="FACTORY_ABSTRACT"></a>Why is the XmlPullParserFactory class not abstract?</h2>
   
   <p>The XmlPullParserFactory is not abstract to allow to use it "directly". 
   Typical XMLPULL V1 API implementation should provide its own factory that 
  @@ -229,7 +229,7 @@
   minimize size of XMLPULL implementations in J2ME environments - there 
   is no need to write a factory class since the default XmlPullParserFactory
   can be used. Of course, for really tight memory environments, it may
  -be more appropriat to use the constructor of a 
  +be more appropriate to use the constructor of a 
   parser implementation directly, trading of the need of a
   factory class for some flexibility.</p>
   
  @@ -253,7 +253,7 @@
   <p>The problem with modifiable entries in array is that user may by mistake modify 
   entries (there is no way in java to declare a read-only array). However, this array 
   is provided only to make conversion of parser event types to diagnostic text 
  -description easier; it has no influence on the parsing process itsef. In the worst
  +description easier; it has no influence on the parsing process itself. In the worst
   case, parser error messages using the TYPES array may be affected.</p>
   
   <p>It looks like a method would have been nicer - and would provide
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.