[jdom-interest] SAXOutputter

Bradley S. Huffman hip at cs.okstate.edu
Thu Apr 15 10:02:23 PDT 2004

"Chris B." writes:

> But if the necessary methods were at least protected rather than 
> private, at least it could be worked around without jumping through hoops.

But you have a solution that doesn't require a modification to the API and
doesn't expose methods which may or may not be needed/or exist in the future.
You just don't think it's "proper".

I on the other hand think it would be confusing to have a output(Document)
which calls startDocument like the SAX spec. says to, and a output(Element)
which doesn't.


More information about the jdom-interest mailing list