DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25517>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25517 [PATCH] module source ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-12-15 15:09 ------- For point 4): yes, it certainly makes sense to have support for XMLizable and DOM, see http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25210 ;) I prefer having the XML functionality in a separate source, as I can let that source be XMLizable, which takes away one step of serializing/reparsing. I also made the xmodule source modifiable and for the write operations it becomes more complicated to choose in what form to store the input, so I thought it was better to have a source that specializes to XML. I didin't made the module source modifiable as I had no clear use cases for it, nor was it obvious to me in what form to save the input. Any ideas? For point 1-3 I take care of them later to day. I guess that they apply to the xmodule source as well, so I'll fix them also.
