> > Also, as related issue, I think it's very difficult to cache XML Schema
> > grammar at namespace-level. And why does this necessary after all? I
> > haven't seen such a use case before.
>
> I think there are many many uses for this. But we also need
> to think about caching Schema grammars that don't specify a
> target namespace.
I'd appreciate if you would show me a case where a namespace-level cache
is necessary.
> However, a point that I've made before is that I don't think
> that the two grammars (DTD and Schemas) can use the same
> cache because the grammars really aren't interchangeable.
> But I think we can use the same pool as long as we have a
> way of identifying the grammar type.
I agree that they are not interchangeable in the sense that
SchemaValidator can never use DTDGrammar.
As I wrote in the other mail, I think that the pool is really
unnecessary.
regards,
--
Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI +1 650 786 0721
Sun Microsystems [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
