rOn Mon, 9 Jul 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Giacomo Pati [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 1:13 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: AW: AW: [C2] sitemap editor
> >
> > Yes, Cocoon is only allowed to stay in xml.apache.org until a
> > better home base
> > is found (hopefully its own).
>
> And how is this search for a better home base progressing? Is there anything
> we can do? Would this mean setting up the legal infrastructure such as the
> Apache Foundation, or is this only a technical matter? Is Cocoon big enough
> as a project/community to support its own weight? How about the
> (XSP-)liaison with the axKit-people? etc ... ;-)
>
> > > > The same is true for the xml-java toolkit.
> > >
> > > What is this toolkit?
> >
> > In short: Generating java classes out of XSchemas which are able to
> > serialize/deserialize itself onto/from streams.
>
> Something similar to JAXB (Adelard, http://java.sun.com/xml/jaxb/) but
> specifically aimed at SAX and with XSchema- instead of DTD-support then?
Yes. After a deeper look into the JAXB papers there are a few more
important differences between JAXB and our toolkit:
a) JAXB uses a special binding-description which our toolkit tries not
to need. XSchema should be enough for it.
b) JAXB is not namespace aware which is a must if you like to describe
objects like the SOAP Fault message.
c) The toolkit uses strong typing in the produced marshalled objects.
This means that attributes are not likely to be supported for ordinary
instance variables of the objects because attribute values cannot be
explicitely typed.
Giacomo
>
> </Steven>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
