On Thu, 31 May 2001, Nick Afshartous wrote:
>
> Adding a call to String.trim below in the Digester.endElement
> method below makes surrounding white space in text elements
> insignificant and consistent with the Digester documentation.
>
> Any chance this change could get into the final 1.0 release ?
> --
>
I just committed this fix for both 1.0 and 1.1.
> Nick
>
Craig
>
> public void endElement(String name) throws SAXException {
>
> // if (debug >= 3)
> // log("endElement(" + match + ")");
> List rules = getRules(match);
>
> // Fire "body" events for all relevant rules
> if (rules != null) {
> // if (debug >= 3)
> // log(" Firing 'body' events for " + rules.size() + " rules");
> String bodyText = this.bodyText.toString().trim();
> ********
> ...
>
> Nick Afshartous writes:
> >
> > I'd like to follow up on my original post. It looks like the
> > digester.CallMethodRule.body method doesn't remove whitespace
> > from both ends of the XML body text. However, other rules
> > like digester.CallParamRule.body actually do by calling method
> > String.trim.
> >
> > Maybe the call to String.trim should be in a central place
> > (i.e. digester.Digester) so that the individual rules don't
> > have to worry about removing the whitespace ?
> >
> > I'd be happy to work on a patch.
> > --
> >
> > Nick
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Nick Afshartous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: digester and whitespace in XML text body
> > Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 17:11:27 -0400 (EDT)
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm using the digester to process the nested content in
> > XML tags and am noticing that the leading/trailing whitespace
> > doesn't seem to be removed as advertised in the doc.
> >
> > For instance, the rule
> >
> > digester.addCallMethod("gateway/application/app-name",
> > "setAppName", 0);
> >
> > results in the method setAppName being called with the surrounding
> > whitespace in
> >
> > <app-name> foo </app-name>
> >
> > If anyone has any idea how to tell the digester to ignore
> > the leading/trailing whitespace please let me now, thanks.
> > --
> >
> > Nick
> >
>
