RE: [xsl] setting an URIResolver - who is correct, saxon or xalan

In my view the spec is ambiguous in this area. The spec for
setURIResolver() on the TransformerFactory says that the URIResolver is
used for xsl:import and xsl:include; the spec for getURIResolver()
implies that it is also used for the document() function.

I have asked for the spec to be clarified in this area and I believe
that Sun are aware of the problem.

Meanwhile, setting the URIResolver on both the TransformerFactory and
the Transformer should work with every processor.

Michael Kay


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> Robert Koberg
> Sent: 31 May 2003 16:32
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: resin-interest@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [xsl] setting an URIResolver - who is correct, saxon or xalan
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I just figured out why I am having problems switching between 
> XSL processors, namely Xalan, Saxon and the Resin servlet 
> container's own Impl.
> 
> With Saxon I can set the URIResolver once on the 
> TransformerFactory and it is also used by the Transformer.
> 
> But with Xalan, I need to set the URIResolver on both the 
> TransformerFactory and the Transformer. 
> 
> I haven't tested Resin yet, but I would bet is the same as Xalan.
> 
> I can see benefits to both approaches, but I would hope for 
> standard way to do it. I will set them both, which works in 
> Saxon regardless. It seems correct to me that the Transformer 
> should inherit it's factory's resolver. It seems overkill to 
> set it twice since the transformer comes from the factory.
> 
> Have I simply stumbled on a Saxon 'feature' but really been 
> doing it wrong all this time?
> 
> Who is right? Or if there is no right way, what are your thoughts?
> 
> Best,
> -Rob
> 
> 
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
> 


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list