Hi Andy, >And in the case of adding a various systemId information to various methods, we might want to think about passing this information as an XMLResourceIdentifier to simplify the method calls. Whatcha think?
Sounds like an excellent idea to me. I'll undertake to make these changes while I'm adding XMLResourceIdentifier and company--though I'll really appreciate it if someone looks over the relevant code and makes sure I've got all the right methods. So my plan is to do this over Thursday and Friday, since I anticipate it'll be a bit interesting, making sure all the things get called in all the right places; if folks could avoid making substantial commits--especially to any methods involving grammar pools or I/O--for the next two days, that would be *really* great. Does this sound good? >There is also Petr's request to add augmentation information to the DTD handlers for the same reasons that we added them in the document handler interface. I'm in favor of the change and would even volunteer to make the changes. Would it be possible for you to do this tonight Andy? I think I heard something about you heading off on holiday after Friday; so I'm wondering how you and I will avoid stepping on each other with these two rather considerable modifications. Any suggestions? This does sound like a good idea, and you're the guy to do it; so I'm sure we'll figure something out. >We could add another XNI extension package for the generic grammar caching interfaces. I don't have a problem with that. I'm just concerned about the size of the core XNI packages and want to be *very* picky about what gets added to xni and xni.parser. Okay, fair enough. I'll put the grammar-specific stuff in xni.grammars, as I proposed yesterday. Cheers, Neil --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
