Edwin Goei wrote: > Sorry for sounding ignorant... I was responding to the original question
You didn't sound arrogant. > An alternative would be this (current?) inheritance design: > > StandardParserConfiguration (for only DTD validation) > | > +-- SchemaParserConfiguration (for XML Schema & DTD) > [...] We could certainly do this with the only downside being that the number of combinations is, well, combinatorial. :) However, we could decide on a set number of "common" configurations and provide a dynamic configuration perhaps driven by some XML file so that people can more easily tweak their own configuration. [Q] Do you think it would be a good idea to make a xerces.parsers.config package just to store the common set of parser configurations? Otherwise the parsers package is going to get messy. > 1.4.3, but I believe it is a better API design. (Currently, turning on > validation in Xerces 1.4.3 also turns on XML Schema validation.) In > this approach, assuming that namespaceAware is true, turning on This is a common problem people have: because JAXP defines the standard settings to be NOT do namespace processing and then the Schema code barfs unless they explicitly turn it on. BTW, could you post a link to the discussion about what is being considered for the next version of JAXP? > this approach is taken, then the JAXP code could select which > *Configuration class to instantiate. Very true. -- Andy Clark * IBM, TRL - Japan * [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
