Am 12.12.2003 um 13:44 schrieb Peter Reilly:
Christopher Lenz wrote:
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);

}

We could instead use SAX style: public class DynamicConfiguratorNS {

   public Object createDynamicElement(
       String namespaceURI,
       String localName,
       String qualifiedName);

   public void setDynamicAttribute(
       String namespaceURI,
       String localName,
       String qualifiedName,
       String value);

Personally, I prefer DOM style as it is higher-level. The qualifiedName parameter makes sense (well, sort of) when you can enable/disable namespace support. When namespace support is always enabled (as it is in Ant 1.6) the (namespaceURI, prefix, localName) partitioning makes more sense IMHO, and is easier to use.


However, I really think we should pass a NamespaceContext (working title) instead of the prefix, as explained in another post in this thread.

Cheers,
  Chris

--
Christopher Lenz
/=/ cmlenz at gmx.de


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



Reply via email to