Re: default for using ' in OutputOptions?

At 10:08 PM 6/26/2003 +0200, you wrote:
> No. I just suggest/ask kindly to provide a very clean documentation for
> the projects that include and use XMLC (for example my favourite one -
> Enhydra), so that the other application developers in future won't have
> to fight the very same problems I faced when I tried to actually *use*
> the XHTML in todays browsers.

I have updated OutputOptions to provide more explanation of the various 
options.  Check out the latest CVS and run javadoc to see what I 
added.  Hopefully, this will suffice for documentation.

> In other words, I agree with the non-quirks settings so that stock XMLC
> produces 100% pure XML, but at the same time I wish the Enhydra worked
> out-of-the-box and to generated 100% *compatible* XHTML/HTML (for todays
> standard of browsers, i.e. IE 6/Gecko browsers generation).

Oh, good.  That's one vote (other than mine) for keeping the defaults 
quirks free :-)

> Here I assume it's possible for Enhydra to modify the OutputOptions
> internally since the document.writeDOM() is Enhydra's method, right?

Hmm...  Not really sure.  There are a writeDOM() methods in XMLCContext 
that look like this...

public void writeDOM(HttpServletRequest request,
                         HttpServletResponse response,
                         OutputOptions outputOptions,
                         XMLObject document) throws IOException {


public void writeDOM(HttpServletRequest request,
                         HttpServletResponse response,
                         XMLObject document) throws IOException {

The latter method grabs the default output options, adds a couple options, 
and calls the former method.  So, I imagine that Enhydra does the same 
thing.  The javadoc information I added to OutputOptions should provide 
some insight as to what options Enhydra might want to add for 
out-of-the-box functionality for various document types.

>  So
> the guys at Enhydra team need to know what XMLC quirks to enable - and
> for this I'd like to see the clear bit of documentation.

Hopefully OutputOptions is now clear enough.

> Thanks for listening. I haven't done a bit of work on XMLC so my voice
> can't be as strong as yours but I think I got a point above.

Always speak up.  You were heard (eventually) and now the result is an XMLC 
that should work much better for you and others.  Thanks for contributing :-)

> Petr