[jdom-interest] Urgent Request to Add a method in SAXBuilder class

Alex Rosen arosen at silverstream.com
Tue Jul 31 16:28:43 PDT 2001

> I'm OK with adding the setFeature() feature.

Cool, I'm glad we're agreed on this.

> The TODO gives my thoughts:
> * Consider a builder.setFeature() pass-through method that allows any
>   features to be set that aren't in the http://xml.org namespace.  Make
>   those in http://xml.org not to be touched because either we have
>   requirements for them to be set one way, or we have the feature exposed
>   through a Java method.

Hmmm... The restriction seems a little artificial. What if in the future we
require a non-xml.org feature to be set a different way (maybe to work
around a bug in a particular parser)? What if in the future a new xml.org
feature is added? Nobody will be able to use it until we change the JDOM
API, right? etc.

Instead, we could just throw an exception if the user tries to set something
that we can't handle. Your way is more self-documenting, but my way is more

> We'd have to document the method as one to use as a last resort and
> point out that changing settings might break JDOM parsing today, and
> even if it doesn't break anything today it might break parsing in a
> future JDOM version because what JDOM parsers require in
> parser feature settings may change over time.


> Alex, do you want to create a patch?  Your builder patches last time
> were excellent!  :-)

Does your flattery increase as your workload goes up? :) Yup, I can send a

Alex Rosen
SilverStream Software

More information about the jdom-interest mailing list