the typical digester use case is xml->java mappings. most of the example code out there following this pattern.

if i understand you correctly, you intend to create a event driven architecture rather than a processed-custom-object-model architecture. this sounds pretty interesting - if your implementation is going to be open source i'd be interested to take a look sometime (if i ever hav any free time again).

SAX is the classic way to build event driven xml applications. the problem with SAX is that the events are low level with xml symantics. beyond a certain complexity, using a SAX wrapper to add a layer of abstraction can make things easier. digester is one such layer. digester wraps SAX and allows higher level processing by rules - actions executed when the element path matches according to a flexible set of matching rules.

this design means that it should be possible to create event driven applications using digester rules to create higher level ones - but i'm not aware of anyone who's explored this use case. maybe scott (if he's out there) has.

anyway, i'd say that digester is a better match than a xml->object mapper and that if digester is not appropriate, you might need to use SAX directly.

- robert

On Tuesday, June 10, 2003, at 08:54 PM, Shahed Moolji wrote:

I have used Castor more than a year ago for XML->Java mappings.

But it did not seem to have the ability to generate "events" as it parsed
the document.
All it did was convert an xml file to a bean and vice-versa.

Perhaps a lot has happened since then ?


I am also looking at OpenVXI, but thats written in C/C++, and I may just write a Java Wrapper for that ?

Anyway my first instinct is to go with digester .....

Thanks for your input.


--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to