On 09/04/2014 22:19, Chris Hegarty wrote:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8039470/02/webrev/
That, that is easier to see the changes.
In URL then it's not clear to me why the javadoc has to admit to a
"system default package". Would it make sense to change this to just say
that it falls back to using a built-in protocol handler if it is available?
I also wonder about the wording in ContentHandler. For the sentence
starting with "By default it looks in ..." then I wonder if it would
make sense to re-word this so that it deals with the
java.content.handler.pkgs property first and just say that if this is
not defined then it falls back to using a built-in content handler if it
exists. The latter could be placed after the section on the package
structure and would make it clear that this package structure is only
specified for the case that the property is set.
-Alan.
