Martin Stricker wrote:
>
> Shane Curcuru wrote:
>
> > Let's work on this discussion for a bit and get more participants. If
> > needed we might cross-post once to general@xml to get more folks to
> > come look over here (I was impressed you all actually subscribed! I
> > thought it was still edwin and sam and me!) I'm glad there's interest
> > here, it will remind me to come back to visit more from the many
> > emergencies at work...
>
> I concur mostly with you, Shane: xml-commons shouldn't become a
> repository of useful pieces of code (but another subproject like
> "xml-tools" might, that's not a bad idea) but more of "glue code"
> between the different xml.apache.org subprojects.
Sorry but I'm not sure of what you mean by 'glue code': for example,
Cocoon 'glues' together Xerces, Xalan, Fop, Batik, XIndice and Soap.
What more 'glue code' do you need?
> xml-commons should
> prevent subprojects to reinvent the wheel and provide a common
> repository of shared code (hence the name).
Yes, I share this vision, but "shared code" is very different from "glue
code" in my vision of software architectures.
For example, Norman's entity resolver is such a code that is very likely
to be shared across different projects (just like SAX, DOM, JAXP and all
the 'very basic' XML stuff)
This is also why I don't like the idea of 'xml-tools': it's too general.
'commons' is appropriate for stuff that are so common that could be
placed in almost any other project. Sort of common denominator between
projects.
This is what I'd like to have.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
