Hi,

Glen Daniels wrote:
> I'm not worried about the DOM dependency either.  Schema processing is
> typically (not always, but usually) going to be a design time thing
> where squeaking every bit of performance out isn't as important. 

Its not about performance I'm talking here. Think of a situation where
you have the whole WSDL in an OM tree. Do you want to get the schema
element from it, build DOM and pump it to XmlSchema. I hope you won't
say yes, if you care at least a lil bit about elegance.

This is the exact thing Oshani is doing in her effort in integrating
StAX support for Woden.

> I *really* don't want to get into another whole "Yet Another XML Factory
> Abstraction" thing unless we truly need it.  And DOM is a pretty
> convenient 

Since when you started to say DOM has a convenient API? I for one hates it.
I can remember you were hating DOM apis a lot, during the first Axis2
f2f and was very much impressed with JDom API.

> (and standard, as Ajith points out) API for walking around an
> XML tree with lots of cross-references.

Anyway, I'm ok to go ahead with DOOM as Sanjiva suggested.

-- Chinthaka

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to