Re: default for using ' in OutputOptions?
Jacob Kjome <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.java.enhydra.xmlc |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
At 10:08 PM 6/26/2003 +0200, you wrote:
>No. I just suggest/ask kindly to provide a very clean documentation for
>the projects that include and use XMLC (for example my favourite one -
>Enhydra), so that the other application developers in future won't have
>to fight the very same problems I faced when I tried to actually *use*
>the XHTML in todays browsers.
I have updated OutputOptions to provide more explanation of the various
options. Check out the latest CVS and run javadoc to see what I
added. Hopefully, this will suffice for documentation.
>In other words, I agree with the non-quirks settings so that stock XMLC
>produces 100% pure XML, but at the same time I wish the Enhydra worked
>out-of-the-box and to generated 100% *compatible* XHTML/HTML (for todays
>standard of browsers, i.e. IE 6/Gecko browsers generation).
Oh, good. That's one vote (other than mine) for keeping the defaults
quirks free :-)
>Here I assume it's possible for Enhydra to modify the OutputOptions
>internally since the document.writeDOM() is Enhydra's method, right?
Hmm... Not really sure. There are a writeDOM() methods in XMLCContext
that look like this...
public void writeDOM(HttpServletRequest request,
HttpServletResponse response,
OutputOptions outputOptions,
XMLObject document) throws IOException {
public void writeDOM(HttpServletRequest request,
HttpServletResponse response,
XMLObject document) throws IOException {
The latter method grabs the default output options, adds a couple options,
and calls the former method. So, I imagine that Enhydra does the same
thing. The javadoc information I added to OutputOptions should provide
some insight as to what options Enhydra might want to add for
out-of-the-box functionality for various document types.
> So
>the guys at Enhydra team need to know what XMLC quirks to enable - and
>for this I'd like to see the clear bit of documentation.
Hopefully OutputOptions is now clear enough.
>Thanks for listening. I haven't done a bit of work on XMLC so my voice
>can't be as strong as yours but I think I got a point above.
Always speak up. You were heard (eventually) and now the result is an XMLC
that should work much better for you and others. Thanks for contributing :-)
>Petr