Ted Leung wrote:
> This would be fine by me, because it would solve my problem. But here's
> my concern. Does it make sense to surface all of these kinds of details up
> through XNI? Or does it make sense to solve this some other way, like via
> an object returned as a property
You may be right in the sense that as long as the ability to do
it is on the XMLParserConfiguration, then it doesn't need to
cascade all the way out to the parser. Only the pull parser
implementation would need to know how to do this.
However... there are people that will want to do pull parsing
of DOM and SAX so maybe it's better to make it completely
visible even though most people will just use parse(String) or
parse(InputSource) like they're used to doing.
I don't know if returning a special property is the right way
to solve this problem.
--
Andy Clark * IBM, TRL - Japan * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
