abdera-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James M Snell <jasn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r417652 - in /incubator/abdera/java/trunk/parser/src/main/java/org/apache/abdera/parser/stax: FOMContent.java FOMDiv.java
Date Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:12:10 GMT

One of the reasons I did this the way I did was that it isolated the
change to just a couple of methods and is easy to roll back if need be.
 There are already a number of issues with this change that we'll need
to resolve.  First of all is what happens if the div happens to contain
xml:base and xml:lang, since we're not automatically pushing those
things down to child elements, dropping the div silently ends up causing
significant data loss.  Obviously, that's a bad thing.

What I think will be a better approach would be to roll back this change
and set a separate API on either the Content or Div interfaces for
returning the unwrapped content (e.g. getUnwrappedValue or something).
That method would be required to automatically push xml:base and
xml:lang down to the child elements of the div.

- James

Elias Torres wrote:
> I really appreciate that James is very open to suggestions and reacts
> quickly to people's comments, but I think we need to work more on the
> voting process/discussion of changes before we commit them.
> Let me tell you my needs and hopefully we can see why we need to think
> about this change a bit more.
> I'm working on converting Atom to RDF. This work is mostly about
> defining a data model for Atom not just another representation format.
> It was very enlightening to learn about the extra div element in the
> spec, because it allows us to shove xml:base and xml:lang into it
> without having to touch the actual content of the entry. Therefore, a
> setContent that automatically adds the wrapper div actually doesn't work
> for me, because I need to be able to manipulate the div before setting
> it. It might be the case that there are work-arounds or my problem is a
> non-issue, but in general I think we need to have more discussion around
> our implementation changes and votes  before making fundamental changes
> like this one.
> Just my 2 cents.
> -Elias
> jmsnell@apache.org wrote:
>> Author: jmsnell
>> Date: Tue Jun 27 20:08:03 2006
>> New Revision: 417652
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=417652&view=rev
>> Log:
>>  Content.getValue() with type="xhtml" ... now returns the serialized string without
the wrapper div
>>  Content.setValue() with type="xhtml" ... now automatically adds the wrapper div
(regardless of whether or not the value param already has a div
>>  This automatically bubbles down to entry.getContent(...) and entry.setContent(...)

View raw message