Hi Simon,
I really appreciate your input, thanks again :)
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 19:15:11 +1300, Simon Kitching
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I already tried to explain. Both are soo different. No need for
any worries...
They even serve a different audience I guess. Digester is good
If you're looking for something simple, you may want to check out
http://xstream.codehaus.org/ as well.
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 08:35:01 +0200, Oliver Zeigermann
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Simon,
I really appreciate your input, thanks again :)
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 19:15:11 +1300, Simon
Jakarta Commons Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am 11.10.04 09:50:48:
If you're looking for something simple, you may want to check out
http://xstream.codehaus.org/ as well.
I just checked it out and it looks very sweet! Very clean approach (looks simpler to
me as betwixt because
Could be, but if it already works (with SAX I guess) and it is
maintainable there is not need for a change. xmlio just makes SAX so
much easier and convernient to use.
Oliver
On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 10:08:05 -0400, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
I understand
On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 07:59:53 +0100, robert burrell donkin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
3 alternatives are good but direct competitors are bad. we are short of
developer energy here in the commons and components in the same area
should share a community and coorperate rather than fight for mind
a few comments:
1 in the sandbox, anything goes.
2 if i18n depends on xmlio then xmlio needs to promoted and released
before i18n is. so, it's important that xmlio has a good chance of
being promoted and that any possible issues are discussed now.
3 alternatives are good but direct competitors
xmlio sounds like a nice name. I will prepare something to check in
for general inspection...
Oliver
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 23:27:39 +0100, Stephen Colebourne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the key items in the commons charter is allowing different solutions
to the same problem. So far, we have
Ah, now I understand your fears. Just another XML-Java mapper flying
around ih the user list: http://beck.sourceforge.net/. However,
xmlio is not a mapper to Java objects, you just receiver augmented SAX
call backs. Enough talk, I will prepare something now...
Oliver
On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:27:37
How does this compare with StAX parser implementations?
- Mike
On Thu, 2004-10-07 at 15:53, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
XMLBeans is super high level, XML Im-/Exporter is super low level.
E.g. XML Im-/Exporter (silly name by the way, any better ideas?) could
*theortically* be the base of
StAX is a new parser type. It is streaming, i.e. you get one token
after the other upon request. xmlio still uses a standard SAX parser
and merely augments callbacks.
Oliver
On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 08:03:36 -0400, Mike Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How does this compare with StAX parser
cool.
I look forward to checking it out. IMO - that's what a sandbox is
for.
The dependency issue is a Java problem, not just a Jakarta commons
problem.
BTW- There appears to be a lot of xmlio's out there:
http://www.google.com/search?q=xmlio
You may want to consider a different name.
Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
I understand your fears.
However, xmlio is not a mapper to Java objects, you just
receiver augmented SAX call backs.
Is this something that could be pitched to Digester and XMLBeans to use
under the covers? What would be the pros/cons of their adopting this
package
: Donnerstag, 7. Oktober 2004 23:46
An: Jakarta Commons Developers List
Betreff: Re: XML Im-/Ex-porter into Commons Sandbox
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 23:27:39 +0100, Stephen Colebourne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the key items in the commons charter is allowing different
solutions
to the same problem. So far
, October 08, 2004 05:08
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: XML Im-/Ex-porter into Commons Sandbox
StAX is a new parser type. It is streaming, i.e. you get one token
after the other upon request. xmlio still uses a standard SAX parser
and merely augments
Zeigermann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 05:08
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: XML Im-/Ex-porter into Commons Sandbox
StAX is a new parser type. It is streaming, i.e. you get one token
after the other upon request. xmlio still
Hi,
How does this compare to XMLBeans?
Yoav Shapira
Millennium Research Informatics
-Original Message-
From: Oliver Zeigermann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 3:30 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: XML Im-/Ex-porter into Commons Sandbox
Folks,
on the
XMLBeans is super high level, XML Im-/Exporter is super low level.
E.g. XML Im-/Exporter (silly name by the way, any better ideas?) could
*theortically* be the base of XMLBeans. It is pretty near to SAX.
Oliver
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:38:10 -0400, Shapira, Yoav [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
How
This will create bloat problems for clients that use Digester. For
example: Struts uses Digester for xml parsing. In the future Struts may
want to use the new i18n component. However, if i18n uses XML Im-Exporter
then Struts must drag that along too despite already having a perfectly
fine xml
One of the key items in the commons charter is allowing different solutions
to the same problem. So far, we have tended to avoid this (for example, I
took a conflicting primitives design elsewhere) however we should not block
this.
What is being requested at this point is to factor out some code
On Fri, 2004-10-08 at 11:27, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
One of the key items in the commons charter is allowing different solutions
to the same problem. So far, we have tended to avoid this (for example, I
took a conflicting primitives design elsewhere) however we should not block
this.
What
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 23:27:39 +0100, Stephen Colebourne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the key items in the commons charter is allowing different solutions
to the same problem. So far, we have tended to avoid this (for example, I
took a conflicting primitives design elsewhere) however we should
21 matches
Mail list logo
