Re: question about XML protocol requirements

Another relevant point here would be that R309 *could* conceivably imply
that an XP envelope should be processable without an in-memory
representation existing.  Or in other words, that a stream/event based
API like SAX should be usable, thereby allowing the application to take
action before the full document is processed.

Unfortunately, that also complicates the processing interface, as
well-formedness errors may not be detected until after the application
has already done something important (the original R309 recognized this,
I believe).  This requires tediously specifying a lot of error handling
behaviour, but I believe the benefit to be worth it.

Anyhow, we're still just working on requirements.  The necessary
discussion about this issue won't happen for a while.

MB

Received on Wednesday, 10 January 2001 10:39:12 UTC