• To: Norman Walsh <ndw@n...>
• Subject: Re: [Sax-devel] RFE [ #496133 ] New resolver entry point
• From: Edwin Goei <edwingo@s...>
• Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 11:19:40 -0800
• Cc: sax-devel@l..., "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
• References: <877kr0v0wr.fsf@n...> <090301c193e0$c7ba0960$6800000a@b...> <87lmffnu7b.fsf@n...> <0bcf01c1948e$213b8420$6800000a@b...> <87666iq9ye.fsf@n...> <0f0601c19569$4f44d3e0$6800000a@b...> <87elkwvs1q.fsf@n...> <22cc01c19ad0$516c1f40$6800000a@b...> <87d70gtywn.fsf@n...> <251b01c19af5$d61a5700$6800000a@b...> <87n0zdgglw.fsf@n...> <026d01c1a5cb$09909920$6800000a@b...> <87pu3yz35o.fsf@n...>

Norman Walsh wrote:
> 
> So you propose to parse
> 
>   <xsl:stylesheet ...>
>     <xsl:import href="http://example.com/foo.xsl"/>
>   </xsl:stylesheet>
> 
> without a resolver?
> 
> I suspect that you contend that's the same as the external identifier
> <!ENTITY foo SYSTEM "http://example.com/foo.xsl"> and you plan to
> simply pass it through the entityResolver() hook. I think it's clear
> that I disagree.

Could you explain why you disagree?  Why not pass the href into the SAX
EntityResolver w/ publicID=null and systemID=@href?  I can think of
these reasons:

1) Your app may want two different resolutions of the same URI
2) You don't like mixing up XML REC entity resolution w/ the concept of
general URI resolution

If #1 is not the reason, then in #2, having two different resolvers
seems like it would be more complex to write apps since you would need
to at least provide two methods.

-Edwin

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: [Sax-devel] RFE [ #496133 ] New resolver entry point
    • From: Daniel Veillard <veillard@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Non-validating parser, non-existing DTD,undefined entity and error reporting
• Next by Date: Re: Push and Pull? (Random vs Sequential) (Hierarchical vs Nested)
• Previous by thread: Non-validating parser, non-existing DTD, undefined entity and error reporting
• Next by thread: Re: Re: [Sax-devel] RFE [ #496133 ] New resolver entry point
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread