On 12.07.2008 14:49:03 Andreas Delmelle wrote:
> On Jul 12, 2008, at 14:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Author: jeremias
> > Date: Sat Jul 12 05:19:40 2008
> > New Revision: 676161
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=676161&view=rev
> > Log:
> > Attempt to fix a potential build problem.
>
> FWIW, I've locally replaced all occurrences of File.toURL() in the
> codebase to File.toURI().toURL(). Once I've confirmed this breaks no
> tests, I'll commit the changes, so this is out of the way.
Thanks a lot.
> Going through the occurrences, I'm getting the impression that in
> some cases, we don't even really need the URL. The URI would do just
> fine if we don't need the functionality for opening a stream... Maybe
> in this particular case, passing through a URL could also be avoided
> (?) If the error is generated by the used StreamResult implementation
> calling File.toURL(), then something like:
>
> Result res = new StreamResult(outputFile.toURI().toASCIIString());
>
> would already be enough (?)
In most cases, yes. But there's really a difference between a URI and a
URL. But what's confusing is the following (the Javadocs for
StreamSource):
<quote>
public StreamSource(String systemId)
Construct a StreamSource from a URL.
Parameters:
systemId - Must be a String that conforms to the URI syntax.
</quote>
URL and URI are both used here. But I think "URL" is the mandatory term
here. The other thing is "URI Syntax" which does not refer to "URI"
itself. Since a URL is a URI, but not all URIs are URLs, I believe your
example above is slightly incorrect.
Jeremias Maerki
