+1 for adding the InspectionTransformer code into 2.1.
Thanks,
dims
--- Carsten Ziegeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Donald Ball wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> >
> > > > right! so what i'm thinking now is that we can write an
> > > > InspectionTransformer which
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> > right! so what i'm thinking now is that we can write an
> > InspectionTransformer which can call other Transformers seamlessly - at
> > least, Transformer which have registered themselves as being responsible
> > for a particular namespace. let's s
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> One main problems which is not easily to solve is caching:
> The InspectionTransformer can not be cacheable and therefore is the
> disadvantage that the whole transformation stage is not cacheable
> even if the transformers currently used are cacheable.
Could you give a
