On Wed, 2006-07-26 at 02:11 -0700, Dan Diephouse wrote: > I still don't understand what we're trying to do here. I understood that > they just wanted to create a xmlschema from a stax stream. If so, the > STAXUtils class does it in like a 100 lines of code with no added > dependencies. If we're trying to support OM, that is a completely > different story. Can someone clarify what concrete objectives we're > trying to achieve? Either way I'm completely -1 on a hard stax or axiom > dependency.
If that was desired the right way to do it would to have different builders, one which builds from DOM and one which builds from StaX/AXIOM. The current builders would be the DOM based one of course. You can't possibly -1 providing that flexibility right Dan? No one is forcing you to use AXIOM and you can't force others to use DOM. Live and let live. ;-). Using AXIOM gives a much faster underlying rep that DOM and, in this case, DOM is not required (unlike with the security stuff). So one could make a case for doing a StaX/AXIOM builder easily. And furthermore, because Axis2 and various other projects do use AXIOM its perfectly legitimate to have a StaX/AXIOM builder so that that world can live on comfortably in one single XML Infoset representation. Anyway, no one is proposing that yet AFAIK. Using DOOM seems to address the objectives right now (of not requiring anything except AXIOM) but I wanted to establish the principal above. Sanjiva. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
