[XML-SIG] Uniform interface with Python 2.0

[Paul Prescod]

"Martin v. Loewis" wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
> Yes, but users will expect that basic methodology is similar across
> languages, won't they? 

I don't think anyone will complain if it is simpler and easier to use in
Python than in SAX.

> If not, we could say "the native xmlproc API is
> SAX for Python", yet it still would not be SAX. Essentially, you can
> *not* arbitrarily define SAX.

We've knowingly diverged on a variety of issues. The point is that we
use the same streaming model as SAX. Any saxutils.make_parser() is not
part of Java SAX either.

> But does it also support setting an error handler?

It's an optional keyword argument named "errorHandler".

> > We could add make_parser for those situations but it isn't
> > personally my first priority. You could submit a patch.
> 
> I will.

Okay, but the integration with PyXML is higher priority.

-- 
 Paul Prescod - Not encumbered by corporate consensus
Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it. 
	- http://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/perlis-alan/quotes.html