Elliotte Harold wrote:
Peter B. West wrote:Fopsters,Some of you may be aware of the activity going on around StAX. Java 1.6 (Mustang) was to have included JAXP 1.4, but that looks to be on hold until Dolphin. However, StAX will be part of it, and soon enough, SAX will be a dim memory.Yeah, right. I give this claim about as much credence as I gave the claims that schemas were going to replace DTDs. StAX isn't as disastrously bad as schemas were, but it certainly hasn't justified the hype either. So far I've seen approximately no evidence that it provides any noticeable improvements over SAX. Some people find StAX easier to use the SAX for some use cases, but not all. I suspect Sun never saw the performance improvements they were hoping for from StAX which is why they're now off and running up another wrong path called "Fast Infoset". (I was just looking at some 3rd party performance numbers on that this morning, and guess what? It isn't working out either.)I don't think SAX is the ultimate in XML performance, but I suspect even a factor of two improvement over SAX is going to require something a lot more radical than StAX.
Elliotte, So I exaggerated. But how many better applications can you find me for StAX than processing XSL-FO? If StAX has no application here, it has no application. Is that what you're saying? Peter -- Peter B. West <http://cv.pbw.id.au/> Folio <http://defoe.sourceforge.net/folio/>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
