On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 08:31:44PM +1100, Michael Day wrote: > > Hi Daniel, > > > No because the code parsing it in xmlParseXMLDecl() does not fire any > > SAX event, so any proof of having gone though that path can only be noticed > > by the side effects of that routine. It sets ctxt->version, so if you > > don't have ctxt->version you can be sure you didn't had an XMLDecl, but > > unfortunately I documents are alway created with a version string of 1.0 > > if no XMLDecl is found, see line 9081 of parser.c > > If I submitted a patch to add a hasXmlDeclaration field to the > xmlParserCtxt struct would you consider merging it? :)
No because there is already too much cruft in it. But adding a special value to ctxt->standalone (-2) indicating that the XMLDecl was read but the standlone information was not present would be okay. > (It would also be possible to add a SAX callback to be called when the XML > declaration is parsed, but this seems like overkill for such a small thing > and would require changing the SAX struct which is a bad thing). Don't even think about that. SAX block tend to be allocated by user code changing the size of that data structure is a definite no-no. Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | Red Hat http://redhat.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ _______________________________________________ xml mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/ [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml
