On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Waldhoff, Rodney wrote:
> Bay wrote:
>
> > This leaves a few other classes to
> > decide where they should go.
>
> > 2) http. I imagine this would either
> > go into io or into HttpClient. io seems
> > most likely as HttpClient has a
> > different goal.
>
> IO sounds OK, but we may want to revisit that. I'd like to see us factor
> out some of the HTTP parsing/generating bits in HTTP Client so that they're
> usable independent of the wire-level protocol (driven by some experiences
> using an in-process Tomcat engine), in which case RequestUtils and HttpUtils
> might be clean fit. (I'm gonna send out a note on this and some related
> HTTP Client (3.x?) ideas, probably next week.)
>
> (I'm actually a little confused by the purpose of RequestUtils: shouldn't
> header matching just be a matter of case-insensitive comparision? Can
> someone point to where/why RequestUtils is used?)
IO is sounding like the place then. Lance, are you the main live author of
the http stuff? I see your name on RequestUtils and know you've at least
delved into BrowserDetector. Are you in favour of IO?
>
> > 3) 'util' like classes.
> > Soundex
>
> > Soundex is used by Strings(StringUtil) so it's
> > tempting to send it with it into Lang.
>
> Soundex seems like an String encoding to me, so why not in the codec
> component?
Sounds like the best plan so far to me. Metaphone would go with it.
Currently Strings (StringUtil) calls both, so that would make Lang
dependant on Codec. Not sure if that's desirable.
Bay
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
