Re: Log::XML - Request for Comments, preparing the package for a vote

Hi Michael, > Before I get carried away would it be better to keep the package small or > make it more complete? Or more concretely, I'm thinking of creating a > separate Log_XML_XMLWriter abstract class, a Log_XML_XMLWriter_Simple > implementation and using the external entities idea there. Should I? I think you should provide a very reasonable default implementation that can be used without thinking much about it. Using the same schema log4j does would be such a one. Apart from that, do whatever you'd like to do. I personally would drop the DOM based loggers because they are unusable in practice. > Technically with the external entities idea I could make a Log_XML_String > abstract class as well and just write XML formatted text instead of using > any actual library, or should I just keep it simple? Just write it out. Regarding the filetoolkit: Do you really need it? Why? - mkpath() for example can be replaced with mkdir($path, 0755, true) - all those calls to checkCurrentOS() are unneccessary when you just would compare the os string set in the constructor - why do you need the realpath method? why not use the filename as you got it? -- Regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen Christian Weiske