Re: PROPOSAL (round 3): Extensions to MDR XMI API

Hi Brian,

Brian Smith wrote:
> I agree with Holger. The interface does not make it obvious that 
> sometimes the content handler is used and sometimes it is not used.

I did not say that content handler is not used. In fact, the default 
implementation of XmiWriter methods in XMIWriter would _use_ content 
handler - thus in case when a non-default content handler is set, they 
would ignore the output stream.

> I also think that XMIReader is trying to be too many things at once. 
> Sometimes it is a SAX content handler and sometimes it is an interface 
> to I/O stream-based I/O. "extent" is a property for the SAX-related 
> stuff, but it is a parameter for the JMI-defined stuff. I don't think 
> that it will be the case very often that one will use XMIReader to read 
> a SAX stream _and_ then also use it to read in InputStream. So, I think 
> all the SAX content handler stuff should be factored out into a seperate 
> interface like so:

OK, it seems that we are moving back and forth. I don't see why it is a 
problem to have both types of methods in one class. But in my original 
proposal, I explained how JMI XmiReader and XmiWriter interfaces will be 
implemented by our implementation of XMIReaderFactory and 
XMIWriterFactory which I am still planning on doing. The XMIReader and 
XMIWriter interfaces did not extend XmiReader and XmiWriter. I added the 
inheritance mainly because of your comments. If you wish, I can revert 
it back and remove inheritance from XmiReader/XmiWriter from our XMI 
interfaces. This will also solve your problem with the xmiVersion 
parameter - JMI write methods will disappear from XMIWriter - i.e. 
xmiVersion will not be a parameter of any write method anymore. The 
disadvantage of that is that you will lose ability to use the extended 
features like reference resolver or reference provider with standard 
interfaces.
I don't like adding two more interfaces. If we come to a conclusion that 
the current set of interfaces/abstract classes is not enough, I would 
rather abandon the whole idea of ContentHandlers and return back to 
simple reader and writer.
Martin