I think it [SAX2XMLReader] does need them. If you are suggesting that the SAX 1.0 parser also have the features I am speaking of, great.
Dean, I am not new to Xerces, but I am new to the process of solicitating change to the API's. How would you suggest we proceed? From what you have said, it sounds like you are in favor of these changes too. Bob At 01:59 PM 5/14/2002 -0700, Dean Roddey wrote: >It was clearly always a goal (though maybe not a first order one) that >people would be able to write their own fully functional parsers. Why >doesn't SAXParser itself need these things? > > This is my ideal resolution: > > > > (a) export those two exception classes. > > (b) add an accessor method on the sax2 parser impl to get at the scanner > > (c) add an accessor method on the scanner to get to the grammar resolver. > > > > If (a) were done, I could create my own parser and scanner classes, so >that > > I can get at all the needed schema information. > > If (b) and (c) were done too, I would not need to create my own parser and > > scanner classes. > > > > What are peoples thoughts on incorporating these three changes to Xerces > > versus just the first? Are there any objections to any of these changes? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
