On 5 Jan 2009, at 21:18, Tom Lobato wrote:
> > ok, thank you very much!! > I will try it. > > Anyway, What are the "more general problem" you said? > Just the more general case of mapping xml fragments to objects. Fred > On 5 jan, 19:00, Frederick Cheung <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 5 Jan 2009, at 20:40, Tom Lobato wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 5 jan, 18:16, Frederick Cheung <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> roxml is trying to solve a more general problem - if you models >>>> aren't >>>> activerecord models then they are not going to have a particularly >>>> useful to_xml on it (the time i used it was generated xml to pass >>>> to a >>>> webservice) >> >>> Sorry my bad english. I`m not sure if I understood your answer. >>> My model is activerecord based, but has just simple attributes >>> (strings, integers, >>> dates). Do you mean I don`t need ROXML in this simple case? The non- >>> roxml >>> to_xml/from_xml methods can do the job? >> >> I would have though to_xml/from_xml would be quite enough here. >> >> Fred >> >> >> >>>> It's also pretty handy for parsing incoming xml. > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
