Re: Named Document Implementation Proposal (was Re: Another Bug inXerces112; DOMParser.startElement())

[Andy Clark <an...@apache.org>]

Ramesh wrote:
> No, actually this proposal does not force one to extend DocumentImpl 
> at all. That is the whole point of the proposal.

Creating a new interface still requires people to commit to the
"Xerces" way of implementing a DOM. We could certainly add such
an interface but I don't know if it would help much. I wish the
W3C interfaces had the necessary methods for this kind of 
functionality.

What I have done is modify the code so that if the implementation 
set by name via the document-class-name property subclasses 
DocumentImpl, it can still take advantage of the Xerces methods. 
But looking at the changed code again, I think I have a few 
modifications to make so that it works correctly. I'll make sure 
that it works by the time we do another release.

-- 
Andy Clark * IBM, JTC - Silicon Valley * andyc@apache.org

Re: Named Document Implementation Proposal (was Re: Another Bug inXerces112; DOMParser.startElement())

[Andy Clark <an...@apache.org>]

Andy Clark wrote:
> But looking at the changed code again, I think I have a few
> modifications to make so that it works correctly. I'll make sure
> that it works by the time we do another release.

I just made a few modifications. I think this one will work
better.

-- 
Andy Clark * IBM, JTC - Silicon Valley * andyc@apache.org