commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Strachan <>
Subject Re: [digester] warning of unknown elements and attributes
Date Mon, 28 Apr 2003 16:01:55 GMT

On Monday, April 28, 2003, at 01:59  pm, robert burrell donkin wrote:

> On Friday, April 18, 2003, at 09:58 AM, James Strachan wrote:
> <snip>
>>> the way i'd prefer the no-matching-rules issue to be resolved would 
>>> be through a new Rules implementation. this would wrap another Rules 
>>> implementation and allow rules to be registered which would be 
>>> called when the wrapped implementation returns no matches. i think 
>>> that this would be easy to implement (i might even get round to it 
>>> soonish), be useful in other situations (as well as validation) and 
>>> allow the flexibility to mix-and-match this behaviour with existing 
>>> Rules implementations.
>> Just to check we're on the same page; we could add a method to Rules 
>> to get the non-matching rules. Something like
>> public void addNonMatchingRule(Rule);
>> public List getNonMatchingRules();
>> And these non-matching rules would be fired by digester if no 
>> matching rules are found for a certain element.
> i've knocked up a class to make the discussions a bit easier.

Cool. Wanna go ahead and commit it to CVS?

Another approach could be to merge this functionality into the base 
class (RulesBase) since it already handles the case where no rules 
match - but right now it returns an empty list in this case - it'd be 
trivial to patch this to merge in the logic from the class you've sent.

> rather than add an extra method to the Rules interface, i'd rather 
> create a new class that wraps an existing implementation and fires non 
> matching rules whenever the wrapped implementation returns no matches. 
> i prefer this mechanism since it means that we don't have to change 
> the interface or the contract for existing Rules implementations.

Sounds good to me.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message