Hi Milind,
The main reason this has come up is the wide variety of situations we're
being asked to handle viz. filename conversion. So we're asking the
question of whether we should be in the business of offering these services
at all: Sure they're useful, but we're an XML parser and, surely, there
must be special-purpose utilities for just such situations. My concern is
that, if we agree to provide such utility methods, then we're stuck with
having to support them for a long time. This is not necessarily trivial,
and parser-agnostic code will have to find parser-agnostic workarounds
anyway.
If someone were willing to take this on, then maybe it would make sense.
My own view is that code like this would make a perfect contribution--along
with things like Norm Walsh's Entity resolution code that's already
there--to xml-commons.
That said, there's no question that it makes sense to provide example
conversions; and if we go down this road then we'd certainly want a
prominent FAQ entry with as many examples as possible. I'm just not
convinced we should own the code to do these conversions.
Cheers!
Neil
Neil Graham
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
Phone: 905-413-3519, T/L 969-3519
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|---------+---------------------------->
| | "Milind Gadre" |
| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | ms.com> |
| | |
| | 09/10/2002 10:15 |
| | PM |
| | Please respond to|
| | xerces-j-user |
| | |
|---------+---------------------------->
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
|
| To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: Re: filenames versus URI's
|
|
|
|
|
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
As suggested by someone else in this newsgroup, why not have a set of
methods that localize the conversion of file names, mis-formed URLs etc
to well-formed URIs. All the 'laxity' or 'complexity' can be hidden in
these methods.
> What do people think? Is it too much to ask of applications to
provide
> URI's rather than platform-dependent filenames? Do people think
increasing
> the complexity of our stream-processing code is worth whatever
convenience
> is gained? Is it acceptable that, by allowing filenames, we're
violating
> the letter of many specifications and probably not aiding the cause of
> platform/parser independence, since we're being more permissive than
other
> products are likely to be?
The parser will then accept *only* well-formed URIs, it is the
responsibility of the programmer to use one of the above mentioned
methods to convert filenames etc to well-formed URIs - *before* calling
any parser methods.
Regards...
Milind Gadre
ecPlatforms, Inc
901 Mariner's Island Blvd, Suite 565
San Mateo, CA 94404
C: 510-919-0596
F: 815-352-0779
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
