On Fri, 2004-10-08 at 11:27, Stephen Colebourne wrote: > One of the key items in the commons charter is allowing different solutions > to the same problem. So far, we have tended to avoid this (for example, I > took a conflicting primitives design elsewhere) however we should not block > this. > > What is being requested at this point is to factor out some code from > another project (Slide) to commons. This is IMHO perfectly good and what > commons is for. The code is going to the sandbox where we can all determine > whether it is a good addition to the commons-proper fold. (eg. performance > tests, code design, documentation). Who knows maybe the ideas will end up as > digester 2! IMO thats what the sandbox is for.
I'll certainly have a look at the code to see how it compares with Digester. Like some others I am concerned by the large number of xml->java facilities around (and not just Apache ones), and am not sure the world needs another one. But I know the Slide team are pretty smart, so I'm very curious what this alternative "simple" approach is.. > Finally, the name ;-) > xmlio (ie. xml io) > sax > saxio saxy? :-) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
