> > <log4j:event logger="org.xyz.SomeLogger" > > timestamp="213341234" level="INFO" thread="main"> > > <log4j:message><![CDATA[some message]]></log4j:message> > > <log4j:propertySet> > > <log4j:property name="key1" value="val1"/> > > <log4j:property name="key2" value="val2"/> > > </log4j:propertySet> > > <log4j:mdc> > > <log4j:dc name="key1" value="val1"/> > > <log4j:dc name="key2" value="val2"/> > > ... > > </log4j:mdc> > > </log4j:event> > > I don't see why the > <log4j:property name="key1" value="val1"/> > and > <log4j:dc name="key1" value="val1"/> > Need to be different. > > Essentially you just have a 'generic' map. They have > different names, one is > propertySet (not really a set by the way, definitely a map) > and mdc (also a > map). Why can't they have the same xml data items: > > <log4j:data name="key1" value="val1"/>
I agree with Nicko. It would be better to have a single element type for the key/value data that can be used for both properties and mdc. As to whether the value should be an attribute or data...I have never been convinced that one is better than the other for any good reasons. Attributes are certainly easier to access during SAX parsing than data elements. We should shoot for consistency within the dtd as a whole. -Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
