Hi Dave! > I believe the solution is a bit more complex than that, since the > params are set on a local object, not on a member object.
You're right. I should have had a closer look at the code... :-( > Perhaps a better solution is to have a protected virtual function which > would allow you to intercept the call to set the params? For my special problem that would probably be the best solution. But I would still like the member variables to be protected instead of private as I then would have a chance to do a lot more without having to customize and rebuild Xalan or wait for the next version. Making all functions virtual would be another step in this direction as it allows to overwrite the default behavior. Is there any change that these small changes will be made? Or are there some good reasons, why that is not exactly a very good idea, that I don't see here right now? Of course I could just take the XalanTransformer Class, rename it and do whatever I want... Anyway, thanks for your suggestion! Cheers Wolfgang -- Wolfgang Schell [EMAIL PROTECTED] GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet. http://www.gmx.net
