james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Burrell Donkin" <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Bug in ContentTypeParser.jj?
Date Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:11:02 GMT
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 12:07 AM, Antony Bowesman <adb@teamware.com> wrote:

> Hi Robert,
> > the main pull parser parses all digit boundaries fine.
> Ah, now I see what you mean.  I debugged again and there's two lots of
> parsing
> going on,
> MimeStreamParser.parseHeader()
>   ContentHandler.field(fieldData)
>   BodyDescriptor.addField()
>     getHeaderParams()
> The Message implementation of ContentHandler.field() is parsing the
> message
> using the JavaCC parser, the same as the SimpleContentHandler
> implementation.

the pull parser parses the fields into name and value but the content
handler does not expose the results

> BodyDescriptor.addField() only parses the
> Content-Transfer-Encoding/Content-Type
> headers.  NB: It does not check 'Content-*' headers as the Javadocs state,
> e.g.
> Content-Disposition.
> So, it seems like BodyDescriptor.addField() is the odd-man-out.

IMHO BodyDescriptor.addField() doesn't belong in the interface at all: it
should only be used for initial population by the pull parser

> It's parsing
> the Content-Type header, but using a different parsing mechanism to the
> standard
> ContentTypeParser, and as there's no way in the ContentHandler
> implementation to
> get this BodyDescriptor parsed information to the handler, the handler
> must also
> parse it.

a fully parsed body descriptor is passed in. should be able to use that.

If BodyDescriptor is managing Content-* headers, it should it save them all,
> e.g. in
> private params Map<String, Map<String, String>>;
> where Strings are headerName/paramName/paramValue.
> For example, the Content-Disposition parameters should be available.
>  Currently
> only Content-Type parameters are.
> The it could offer methods such as
> // Returns the parameters for the given header, e.g. C-T or C-D
> String getContentParam(String headerName, String paramName);
> Map getContentParams(String headerName);


> and helper methods:
> boolean isInline();
> boolean isAttachment();

i agree in principal but since BodyDescriptor is an interface it's may be
kinder to implementors to factor them into MimeUtil

> Anyway, I've just dived into the Mime4J as I want to use it for a project
> of
> mine.

it's just unfortunate that Message really isn't as well tested or mature as
the pull parser

> If I make any changes, I'll submit them back as patches at a later date.

that'd be great

- robert

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message