> Kindly let
> me know if there is any disadvantage compared to use with DOM4J.
One problem with all approaches is maintainability. JAXB makes a token concession to
it with "rest" in the content model.
One difference between Quick3 and Quick4 is OCM, which I would like to integrate with
DOM4J at some point. OCM is a model/controller
approach with controller objects attached (via a hash table) to objects in the model
(which makes DOM4J ideal here). Determination
of the class for the controler object is handled by a factory, which is configurable
using another XML document. The factory can
decide based on model object class, model element tag, or any other aspect of the
model (and choice of factory class is also
configurable using that other XML document).
All of Quick4's utilities now are written using OCM. This has significantly reduced
the maintenance effort. But its a bit like
swing's JTree (its a tad complex/abstract)--and developers hesitate to take the plunge.
I really see OCM as a data-centric alternative to XSLT. OCM also seems to be capable
of handling transformations that are far more
complex than is reasonable for XSLT.
But I really like the reduced maintenance. Quick3 about killed me on that score.
Bill
_______________________________________________
dom4j-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dom4j-user
