[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Entity resolution vs. URI resolution
> I think you are saying that resolving 1) an external entity containing a > systemID and 2) a URI in general should go through the same resolver: a > SAX EntityResolver. To do otherwise, would cause confusion. Is this > correct? Pretty much, though the API (EntityResolver2 or whatever) is a different issue from the implementation underlying it. The core issue that URIs should be interpreted consistently. As for the API issue, I fail to see a point for adding another API, and certainly not inside SAX, duplicating existing functionality. Defining another API encourages use of secondary/tertiary/... implementations, creating inconsistency/confusion. But I'm also aware that large applications are rife with such stuff, maintainance problems and all. :) > By resolve, I mean mapping either 1) an external entity to a SAX > InputSource or 2) mapping some kind of URI in general to a SAX > InputSource. The URIs in #2 may come from sources other than those > mentioned in the XML REC itself, such as in XInclude or XML Schema > processing. I think it's perfectly reasonable to pass such stuff through an object that happens to be a SAX entity resolver. Architecturally, the fact that some of the URIs happen to come from entity declarations is one that should be irrelevant to how they are "resolved". - Dave
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|