Per Nyfelt wrote: > > > > I think that getContent() and setContent() should be > > > removed from Resource all together and have > > > String getContentAsString() (or getContentAsText() if that name is > > > preferred) in XMLResource and > > > byte[] getContent() (or getContentAsByteArray() whatever is > > preferred) for BinaryResource. > > > > > > > Do you think we can cut down enough on the confusion by simply adding > > the getContentAsText method in addition to getContent? > > My problem is that there is no contract that makes you sure you will get a > String back from a XMLResource -just a custom or whatever it should be > called. If we add a getContentAsText then when would you use getContent? >
The spec is the contract. If an impl returns something other then a string then the impl is broken. > Would you work with a resource object on the Resource level getting content > out of it without knowing what actual resource it is? e.g. do you do things > like: > > if (resource instanceof XMLResource) > String bla = (String)getObject(); > > If not then I think get and setContent should be moved down a level from > Resource to XMLResource and Binary Resource and have the return and > parameter types changed. That is exactly how I see it being used. > > Best regards, > Per > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Contact adminstrator: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Read archived messages: http://archive.xmldb.org/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Kimbro Staken The dbXML Project http://www.dbxml.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact adminstrator: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Read archived messages: http://archive.xmldb.org/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------
