[jdom-interest] End-of-line sequence.

[Jason Hunter]

Looks great.

-jh-

On Dec 5, 2011, at 2:47 PM, Rolf wrote:

> Based on the limited discussion here, it seems 'disruptive' to change the default end-of-line sequence.
> 
> Instead I have implemented two mechanisms:
> one makes it easier to name/designate the end-of-line sequence, and another mechanism which makes it possible to change the default default-end-of-line sequence. See https://github.com/hunterhacker/jdom/wiki/JDOM2-Feature:-End-Of-Line-Termination
> 
> I think this gives the best of both worlds, plus it reduces the need to supply constant values to the Format class.
> 
> e.g.
> Format.setLineSeparator(LineSeparator.UNIX);
> 
> Rolf
> 
> On 14/11/2011 8:29 PM, Rolf wrote:
>> Hi all.
>> 
>> JDOM has been merrily using "\r\n" as an end-of-line sequence in the
>> XMLOutputer since 'forever'. The XML Spec indicates that all end-of-line
>> sequences should be normalized to a single '\n':
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-line-ends The wording is such that XML
>> parsers should clear out any extra '\r' characters if there are any, so
>> it is not as if the code is completely broken.
>> 
>> But, I think it makes sense to follow the spec, and avoid having
>> different XML compared to other systems.
>> 
>> I propose changing the line separator to follow the spec, but this has a
>> very large impact on anyone who has expectations on JDOM having a
>> particular line-terminator, even though they shouldn't...
>> 
>> I have filed https://github.com/hunterhacker/jdom/issues/53
>> 
>> The original decision was made by Elliotte:
>> http://markmail.org/message/gv7m3xjgrkomrfe7 (it's worth noting that it
>> was changed from the 'platform default' to the constant '\r\n' to create
>> some consistency too).
>> 
>> vvv quote vvv
>> 
>> The one open question in this version is what to use for a line
>> separator. Right now I'm using \r\n since that's most cross-platform
>> compatible and friendliest to various network protocols. However, \n
>> alone might be slightly friendlier to XML parsers. Another possibility
>> is to ask for System.getProperty("line.separator"). However, I'm loathe
>> to make the output platform dependent. What do people think?
>> 
>> ^^^ quote ^^^
>> 
>> Also, the commit introducing this has interesting comments:
>> https://github.com/hunterhacker/jdom/commit/958fb22a4c7088b82f0d48a933bdf4e5c6806151#L0R173
>> 
>> 
>> Two issues I see:
>> 1. "\r\n" was chosen for 'Network protocol' friendliness... is this
>> still a valid argument?
>> 
>> 2. is it OK to change the standard format of all the XML that JDOM
>> produces? (I have been really careful (so far) for the most part to
>> ensure all whitespace (including indents and EOL/EOF is not changed) ).
>> 
>> I see changing the default EOL as being an easy decision, especially
>> since users can still change it back easily on their Format instance.
>> 
>> advantages:
>> 1. Most XML tools do not use "\r" values - better compatibility?
>> 2. XML output will be slightly smaller - ;-)
>> 3. XML produced by 'other' outputters (currently the StAX outputters)
>> can be compared directly with XMLOutputter for testing/compatibility
>> 
>> disadvantages:
>> 1. people may have 'baselines' that contain \r\n terminators, which will
>> then be different from JDOM's default output.
>> 2. there may be some (obscure) protocols that require \r\n terminators
>> and users of JDOM2 will have to override the EOL to be '\r\n' for those.
>> 
>> Anyone have comments/suggestions?
>> 
>> Rolf
>> _______________________________________________
>> To control your jdom-interest membership:
>> http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/youraddr@yourhost.com
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> To control your jdom-interest membership:
> http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/youraddr@yourhost.com