> I sent my position in a mail 2 days ago - here is the most important > part from this mail : > > Let me resume why I'm agains tools like XmlBeans, JAXB, ... and > XML schema : > * Thoses tools are generating java classes and sometime it is > difficult to change the class object structure. We will have a few > number of java classes to read the config file. So write by hand > thoses classes is not a big deal. Futhermore, using a pre-processing > in order to just read a simple config file is a little bit heavy - no > :-) ? > * The mapping file should be very simple - I hope it will be otherwise > the framework will not be used :-). So, a simple DTD is sufficiant. > Xml schema becomes interesting for more complex grammar. See > Jackrabbit, Hibernante, OJB, ... all these frameworks are using very > simple DTD (no XML schema). > * We need to read the mapping file and cache it in memory (in an > object graph). So, Digester is (for me) one of the best tools to do > it. Others framework become interesting when your update the xml file > content. > * See http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-commons/Digester/WhyUseDigester. > > Any comments ?
I have read it and I basically don't disagree (I said we either need a dtd, xml schema or documentation). ;) But Sandro has a different standpoint (he wants XML Schema). > I have a small example to commit. This one can help to see how > digester and beanutil can work together. Let me know if you want to > see the code. I have worked with digester and beanutils before, so I know how it can be done. But I am would like to see the code anyways if possible. I am just saying we are discussing for days now over the XML schema issue without any progress so far. The votes for using XML Schema so far. +1 sandro -1 christophe 0 oliver Does there have to be a majority or an unanimous decision (all votes +1)? regards, oliver
