On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, either add DynamicConfiguratorNS or revert the change I made yesterday to DynamicConfigurator.
I'm more inclined to add DynamicConfiguratorNS.
Same here. Proposed interface:
public class DynamicConfiguratorNS { public Object createDynamicElement(
String namespaceURI,
String prefix,
String localName); public void setDynamicAttribute(
String namespaceURI,
String prefix,
String localName,
String value);}
Where namespaceURI, prefix and localName have the same semantics as in DOM Level 2:
http://www.w3.org/2003/01/dom2-javadoc/org/w3c/dom/Node.html
I don't think this interface should extend DynamicConfigurator. The only effect would be that implementors also would need to implement the old two pair of methods.
Cheers, Chris
-- Christopher Lenz /=/ cmlenz at gmx.de
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
