Selon robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> On Sat, 2005-08-27 at 18:25 +1200, Simon Kitching wrote:
> > On Fri, 2005-08-26 at 15:52 +0200, Sébastien wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > I looked at the DTD of digester-rules and I found something strange. It
> defines
> > > an attribute named param for the tag object-param-rule. This attribute is
> > > marked as REQUIRED but is never used in the factory... What is its
> purpose (I
> > > guess none but why is it there then ?)
> >
> > Good question. I don't know either. The code was committed by Robert
> > Donkin in October 2003, with comment
> >    Added support for ObjectParamRule to xmlrules.
> >    Patch contributed by Anton Maslovsky.
> >
> > As far as I can see, the param element doesn't have any purpose.
> >
> > The ObjectParamRule doesn't really make sense when using xmlrules
> > anyway; it's a way of passing an arbitrary java object to the target
> > method which is very useful when using the API.
> >
> > In its current form, it looks to me like:
> > * "type" must specify a java class name.
> > * if value is not specified, then a default instance of that
> >   type is passed, else convertutils is used to convert the
> >   value string into the specified type.
> >
> > As you say, attribute "param" isn't used anywhere. I don't believe that
> > digester's xmlrules module validates the xmlrules file against the dtd
> > anyway, so it can safely be left out. There are a couple of unit tests
> > for the object-param-rule tag, and neither of them define attribute
> > "param".
> >
> > Perhaps you could create a bugzilla entry for this??
>
> no need: this is definitely a bug in DTD. i've committed the removal of
> that element.
>
> - robert
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>


Thanks a lot

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to