----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: XML to Java Objects


>
>
> On Mon, 16 Apr 2001, Scott Sanders wrote:
>
> > I am going to need to use something for CJAN to create Java Objects from
> > XML.
> >
> > I watched this go around the list a while back, and several solutions
> > were being talked about, including Digester from Struts, XmlMapper from
> > Tomcat, Ant's way to do it, and also JOCL, I think.
> >
> > So, the question is, which one should we start with?  I have ported
> > XmlMapper out of the Tomcat 3.2 code base, and know quite a bit about
> > it, and even like it ;-)  I heard that you guys might be moving on
> > Digester, and I also looked at the Ant way over the weekend.
> >
> > So, Craig, is Digester just an easier to use XmlMapper? Should I move it
> > into the sandbox?
> >
>
> Yes digester is an easier-to-use (and better documented) XmlMapper, but
> that's IMHO.

I'm +1 for moving the Struts Digester to jakarta-common !

>
> Please feel free (and put me in the STATUS.html initial committers list),
> although this raises yet another issue for us to think about.
>
> A lot of the code that has been, or will be, proposed for Commons already
> exists in other Jakarta projects.  This includes (from Struts) the
> beanutils stuff that's already in, Digester, and the FastXxxxx collections
> classes.  Is it important to copy all this stuff into Sandbox for
> evaluation, or can we just have a proposal that says "go look at the
> following classes in the foo project"?
>

I think it might help to move to the sandbox first. Having to look at a
project is more complicated. You have to understand what belongs to the
project and what belong to the part being extracted, ... Also the person
doing the move might find that the part that was supposed to be moved is
actually dependent on some other classes and thus it might need some
refactoring. In essence, it will help define the interfaces for the new
component.

> > Scott Sanders
> >
> >
> Craig
>
Vincent


Reply via email to