Brett Porter wrote:
I haven't been keeping track unfortunately, so maybe I'm missing a piece
of the puzzle.
How does a 'Markup' relate to a 'Parser', which is what I thought the
terminology was for this?
The Markup classes contain utility constants/methods for handling
markup. Constants like these would go into XmlMarkup
String START_MARKUP = "<";
String END_MARKUP = ">";
General stuff that
The only caution I urge is that anything that changes doxia-sink-api
might limit the ability to use it across different versions of Maven.
Other than that, I think it'd be good to decide the target public API,
write it up and then refactor towards it... it might be easier to
understand holistically.
Yup, we need to be careful not to move too much to the API, but I think
Vincent is only talking about the really general stuff here.
Thanks guys!
Cheers,
Brett
On 30/07/2007, at 7:06 AM, Vincent Siveton wrote:
Hi,
As you know, Doxia modules need to be more consistents. Dennis pointed
the EOL problem today.
I recently added several markup interfaces. I see 2 types of markup
languages handles by Doxia: text (like APT) and xml (like xdoc). I
propose to encapsulate these things with the following interfaces:
Markup (core)
|_ TextMarkup (core)
|_ AptMarkup (module)
|_ XmlMarkup (core)
|_ XdocMarkup (module)
In a second step, I propose to create abstract TextSink and XmlSink to
encapsulate writer. With this, we will remove inconsistencies in the
output like LineBreaker (docbook, xdoc) vs PrintWriter (xhtml).
Thoughts?
Vincent
--
Dennis Lundberg
