Talk:Simple API for XML

message: Who wrote this text? I doubt computer geeks need a wiki entry for this. Can we tone it down a bit??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.228.222.129 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 13 April 2006
:Could you be a little more constructive in your criticism? Why does this article bother you so much? --85.224.6.48 14:47, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sorry this article is here, and not sorry for what it says.  But it needs much more!  It needs a great deal of broader explanation and context.  I have decades of computer tech experience, and I can only just barely guess what this article is about.  After looking at the SAX and DOM articles, I still don't even really know what they are about, let alone understand the content. 69.87.200.97 20:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: May be. But the Russian article is more informative. :) 195.128.58.78 13:02, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well that does it. We have to get some good old fashion cold-war-era arms race going on here. But with wikis. A wiki-race. Unfortunetly, I know next to nothing about SAX vs. DOM and I was more interested in expat.  64.238.49.65 22:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is working great for me.  I've never used SAX but now have an application that it would work well for.  A lightweight concise introduction is just what I require.  User_Talk:MichaelCrawford  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.0.61.251 (talk) 21:02, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huh? 

message: Footnote three, annotating an assertion that "SAX processes documents state-dependently", says just the opposite: "In a nutshell, SAX is oriented towards state independent processing, where the handling of an element does not depend on the elements that came before. StAX, on the other hand...". Just wanted to check if I was missing something before changing this - to get the logic entirely backwards would seem a strange mistake to make -- Doubious (talk) 23:44, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  State-dependent or -independent? 

message: Should this article be listed in :Category:XML parsers ? The java implementation is an XML parser, but the article discusses SAX as a standard. 82.99.7.155 (talk) 13:37, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories 

message: I don't think that's an accurate statement at all. For example, in Java, most methods of javax.xml.validation.Validator throw SAX exceptions: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/javax/xml/validation/Validator.html
It seems like that phrase has been in here since 2007 with no citation to back it up: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Simple_API_for_XML&oldid=109669213  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard.jp.leguen (talk • contribs) 00:12, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Virtually any kind of XML validation requires access to the document in full 

message: Why is "single pass" marked as unclear? Is it considered insufficiently precise or what? It's about reading each line of the XML file sequentially, with no turning back. XSLT is allowed to return to an earlier point, for instance. --Nemo 20:46, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Single pass