Return-Path: 
 <cocoon-dev-return-22859-apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive=xml.apache.org@xml.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive@xml.apache.org
Received: (qmail 86320 invoked by uid 500); 15 Feb 2002 20:53:51 -0000
Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: <mailto:cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org>
list-post: <mailto:cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org>
Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
Received: (qmail 86303 invoked from network); 15 Feb 2002 20:53:50 -0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: media@pop3.demon.co.uk
Message-Id: <a0510120eb8932376d74d@[10.0.1.40]>
In-Reply-To: <007901c1b653$03851a40$90a4558b@vgritsenkopc>
References: <007901c1b653$03851a40$90a4558b@vgritsenkopc>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 20:52:25 +0000
To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
From: Jeremy Quinn <jeremy@media.demon.co.uk>
Subject: RE: FileWritingTransformer
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

At 2:00 pm -0500 15/2/02, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>> From: Jeremy Quinn [mailto:jeremy@media.demon.co.uk]
>
><snip/>
>
>> >Question #2: do you check if the <xfwt:write> element includes *one*
>and
>> >only *one* nested element? If not, we could end up with problems
>later
>> >on.
>
>Wait, why such a limitation? What if you want to write few files, not
>one? The result modes of the transformer might be:
> - exception in case of error,
> - <xfwt:result/> tag
>
>
>> No I don't, I'll add that to my list, thanks.
>
>Please reconsider this addition :)

I thought he meant something different ....

ie. make sure the document you make, cannot have more than one root by mistake.

Not, make sure there is only one <xfwt> tag in the whole stream.

I'd like to be able to modify more than one file at once if required as well.


><snip/>
>
>> A namespace declaration for xfwt is always output to the files it
>writes to.
>> It was already in the Document that the file is generated from so it
>> happens automatically.
>>
>> I am trying to decide if this is a good thing or not.
>>
>> In one way it is quite cute ;) a kind of signature, but in another
>sense it
>> is pollution, if there are no xfwt tags in the file, why the hell
>should it
>> declare that namespace?
>>
>> If I filter it out however, then no-one can edit files containing that
>> namespace anymore.
>
>Why do you think this? Just add a namespace when you need it later.
>
>
>> Which is the right way to go do you think?
>
>I think there is no need (and may be even harm) to have xfwt namespace
>declared needlessly.


Unless I am to buffer the whole document before Serializing it, I do not
understand how I can tell that the part I am Serializing to file is going
to have something in the xfwt namespace before I have to start prefix
mapping.

Maybe I do not understand Sax Processing properly.


regards Jeremy
-- 
   ___________________________________________________________________

   Jeremy Quinn                                           Karma Divers
                                                       webSpace Design
                                            HyperMedia Research Centre

   <mailto:sharkbait@mac.com>     		 <http://www.media.demon.co.uk>
   <phone:+44.[0].20.7737.6831>             <pager:jermq@vizzavi.net>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org