Hi,
On 10/23/07, Keith R. Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I would rather see InputStream as the primary source
> > of byte streams to be processed.
>
> I understand. That's what I meant by "where our API requires an
> *identifier*". I meant "identifier" in the precise sense ("textual tokens
> (also called symbols) which name language entities", as per wikipedia), but
> I can see that that could be easily misinterpreted if it is used more
> casually.
I noticed that, but I don't see that many places where we'd really
need an identifier instead of a byte stream.
Of course there are occasions where you can extract stuff like a
resource name or a content type hint from a URL or a File, but I think
such cases are best handled in utility methods that associated those
hints with a resolved InputStream.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
