maven-doxia-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dennis Lundberg <>
Subject Re: Design thoughts
Date Mon, 30 Jul 2007 09:06:41 GMT
Brett Porter wrote:
> I haven't been keeping track unfortunately, so maybe I'm missing a piece 
> of the puzzle.
> How does a 'Markup' relate to a 'Parser', which is what I thought the 
> terminology was for this?

The Markup classes contain utility constants/methods for handling 
markup. Constants like these would go into XmlMarkup
   String START_MARKUP = "<";
   String END_MARKUP = ">";

General stuff that

> The only caution I urge is that anything that changes doxia-sink-api 
> might limit the ability to use it across different versions of Maven. 
> Other than that, I think it'd be good to decide the target public API, 
> write it up and then refactor towards it... it might be easier to 
> understand holistically.

Yup, we need to be careful not to move too much to the API, but I think 
Vincent is only talking about the really general stuff here.

> Thanks guys!
> Cheers,
> Brett
> On 30/07/2007, at 7:06 AM, Vincent Siveton wrote:
>> Hi,
>> As you know, Doxia modules need to be more consistents. Dennis pointed
>> the EOL problem today.
>> I recently added several markup interfaces. I see 2 types of markup
>> languages handles by Doxia: text (like APT) and xml (like xdoc). I
>> propose to encapsulate these things with the following interfaces:
>> Markup (core)
>>   |_ TextMarkup (core)
>>     |_ AptMarkup (module)
>>   |_ XmlMarkup (core)
>>     |_ XdocMarkup (module)
>> In a second step, I propose to create abstract TextSink and XmlSink to
>> encapsulate writer. With this, we will remove inconsistencies in the
>> output like LineBreaker (docbook, xdoc) vs PrintWriter (xhtml).
>> Thoughts?
>> Vincent

Dennis Lundberg

View raw message