Andy Clark wrote: > > Petr Kuzel wrote: > > Yes, parameter entities. My scanner can then generate an additional info > > without a need for private interface. > > What extra information. I don't see a problem with adding > augmentations to the other handlers -- I'm just curious as > to what additional DTD information you'd like to pass along.
Those that are hidden by DTD scanner i.e. parameter entities in markup. As I said I can live without it, as I will need to rewrite scanner. I can create a side channel, but then appears problems with synchronization. > > Once in history I even thought about a method augment(Augmentations) > > that could be called prior particular handler callback if needed. > > Later pipe components must propagate it in same manner. It is alternative > > approach to the extra parameter. Unfortunately it may complicate logic. > > This is a bad idea because there's no way to guarantee that > the two separate callbacks can be associated together. Since > the parser is configured as a pipeline of separate components, > there may be components later in the pipeline that add or > remove method calls. Then the augmentations passed separately > are no longer in sync. That is right, I called it complicated logic :-). > > > public void setValues(String value, String nonNormalizedValue); > > > > It is an interface so I would keep method count as low as possible. > > -1 > > Okay. Do you want to submit a patch to fix this problem? Already done, even twice. It's really tiny one. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5745 Cc. -- <address> <a href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>Petr Kuzel</a> at Sun Microsystems : <a href="http://xml.netbeans.org/";>XML module</a> and : <a href="http://jini.netbeans.org/";>Jini</a> developer.</address> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
