Hi,
Sounds good. While you're up, could you have your utility class implement EntityResolver, as well, so it can be used at the SAX level?
Bob Foster http://xmlbuddy.com/
Michael Glavassevich wrote:
Hi everyone,
We've been re-evaluating our original approach for including support for XML catalogs. Instead of adding a new parser property we think it would be better to use the existing entity resolver property and make what would have been a catalog manager an implementation of XNI's XMLEntityResolver which would probably live in the util package. We would provide an implementation of resolveEntity but users could override it to do something else. They could also use the source of the class we provide as a template for creating catalog resolvers for other types of catalogs. Having disjoint resolvers forces that we come up with an order for calling them (with no spec to base on which to base a decision) which we originally did but we're now aware of several use cases where consulting the catalog and then calling an entity resolver isn't the appropriate thing to do. Having that behaviour built into the parser would work for some but certainly not everyone, and since what we were discussing looked very much like an entity resolver anyway, why call it something else?
I propose we just have a utility class (for now) as well as including the XML commons resolver with the parser.
Michael Glavassevich XML Parser Development IBM Toronto Lab E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
