At 10:01 AM 6/2/2003, you wrote:
Why not just add a parameter which removes them or not, big deal. No reason for Yet Another Class.
-Andy
On 6/2/03 9:34 AM, "Geoff Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <quote-from-wiki> > So... what I ended up doing was extending the HTMLSerializer (or whatever > serializer you're using for your pipelines), and overriding the > startPrefixMapping and endPrefixMapping methods to do nothing, effectively > removing all namespaces from my HTML. This also had the added benefit of > having no performance penalties (and theoretically, a ever-so-slight > speedup since we no longer process namespaces in our serializer). > </quote-from-wiki> > > I have done exactly this before -- does this still work from a purely > technical perspective? If so, why wouldn't we just define an > NoNsHTMLSerializer which extends HTMLSerializer and overrides > just those two methods? Then, it's a user decision whether these > namespaces belong > in real-world html. > > Geoff Howard > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
-- Andrew C. Oliver http://www.superlinksoftware.com/poi.jsp Custom enhancements and Commercial Implementation for Jakarta POI
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi For Java and Excel, Got POI?
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
