Scott, Once implemented the printers shouldn't change much, just drop them into the distribution. The same printers can be in the distribution for both. They are small, and if we do a joint archive with both Xalan and Xerces they can share the same set of printers.
--Keith Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus wrote: > > I like this arrangement (printers in the parser) more than a separate > > package. > > That means a separate download, which is a bad thing. > > I'm not sure it has to be a separate download... both the Xalan and Xerces > tarballs can carry the jar file. > > I'm a little worried about the organizational dependencies in putting it in > xerces. XSLT is highly dependent on the serializers, and I would want the > xalan folks to have commit access to these classes. > > -scott > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > ia.com> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > cc: (bcc: Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus) > 11/15/99 Subject: Re: [Proposal] Printer > package > 02:20 PM > Please > respond to > xerces-dev > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Assaf Arkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, November 15, 1999 10:52 AM > Subject: Re: [Proposal] Printer package > > Okay, I just took a quick look through the code: > > In general I like what I see. This is much better than our existing > sample code for printing, and it centralizes the actual printing code > so that we don't have to update one code base for DOM and another > for SAX. Once this code has made it in, we should make the samples > use this code base. > > > > > I totally agree we need a separate tree walker. In my opinion there > > should be a set of generic utility classes, including DOM->SAX, > > SAX->DOM, whitespace handling, namespace stripping, etc. > > I agree too. Since we have support for the DOM L2 traversal stuff, I'd > like to see if we can cast some of these utilities in terms of the new > package. > Also, there's SAX1 and SAX2 versions to be taken care of. > > Also, I'd like to see a printer that can generate "canonical" XML. This is > especially handy for testing purposes. > > > My personal opinion is that the basic printers belong in the parser, the > > parser being the more general case of XML usage. I assume most users who > > download Xalan also have Xerces installed, or can obtain the > > printer/utility packages separately. In my understanding FOP implements > > it's own printer that requires the FOP code base, and Cocoon should > > implement it's own framework for printers to use the default, FOP or > > whatever comes along (application code). > > I like this arrangement (printers in the parser) more than a separate > package. > That means a separate download, which is a bad thing.
