Re: SAXParserFactory vs. TransformerFactory (was: Re: cvs commit: ....)
On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 03:50:44PM -0700, Glen Mazza wrote: I agree; however we are none the worse off for Simon's SAXParser example, and we even got a more powerful DefaultHandler object in our API as a bonus. Glen --- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I simply think that the Transformer pattern is very universal and quite easy to use and understand. My reason for insisting on the SAXParser example is that it can be programmed with only knowledge of the javax.xml.parsers package, and no knowledge of javax.xml.transform. People with no experience in embedding transformations may find a SAXParser example easier to apply. That was my own situation until this thread. Regards, Simon -- Simon Pepping home page: http://www.leverkruid.nl
Re: SAXParserFactory vs. TransformerFactory (was: Re: cvs commit: ....)
On 20.07.2004 00:50:44 Glen Mazza wrote: I agree; however we are none the worse off for Simon's SAXParser example, I didn't want to imply such a thing, just stating my opinion. I'm sorry. and we even got a more powerful DefaultHandler object in our API as a bonus. Glen --- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I simply think that the Transformer pattern is very universal and quite easy to use and understand. Jeremias Maerki
Re: SAXParserFactory vs. TransformerFactory (was: Re: cvs commit: ....)
I don't think there's a considerable difference. The identity transformer in Xalan-J is essentially a SAXParser and a 1:1 piping-through of SAX events. It's just a bit more setup code for the Transformer variant, I think. The choice about what to use is really personal preference. I simply think that the Transformer pattern is very universal and quite easy to use and understand. On 18.07.2004 02:33:21 Glen Mazza wrote: Incidentally, is there any significant performance difference between the two methods? I'm hoping no, i.e., we can use internally whichever proves more convenient. Jeremias Maerki
Re: SAXParserFactory vs. TransformerFactory (was: Re: cvs commit: ....)
I agree; however we are none the worse off for Simon's SAXParser example, and we even got a more powerful DefaultHandler object in our API as a bonus. Glen --- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I simply think that the Transformer pattern is very universal and quite easy to use and understand.
