Hi,
FYI: I checked in the first cut of the StAX-based loaders under scdl4j/stax.
The logic is very similar to the SAX handlers.
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "Raymond Feng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: SCDL4J (was Re: Working in trunk, was: Objective of the
following sandbox - tuscany/sandbox/sebastien/java
Hi,
I'll give a try to reorganize the current StAX based loader framework to
support the loading of SCDLs using StAX.
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jean-Sebastien Delfino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: SCDL4J (was Re: Working in trunk, was: Objective of the
following sandbox - tuscany/sandbox/sebastien/java
ant elder wrote:
On 3/29/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip/>
I haven't seen any replies to this, so under revision r523577 I copied
the assembly and policy model modules that I have been working on in my
sandbox to the trunk. I put the code under tuscany/java/sca/scdl4j, as
discussed in [3], for people to review or experiment with it. This is
an
addition to the trunk, not breaking any other module. I'm planning to
continue to work on this in the trunk under tuscany/java/sca/scdl4j.
I think this was said on the other thread about this, but just to be
clear,
this is also going to include XML serializers and deserializers isn't
it? So
for a start we could just copy all the existing Loaders to the scdl4j
module
and hook them up to create the various assembly objects?
Yes. we need serializers/deserializers (or readers/writers) that support
the latest SCDL. When I tried to reuse the core loaders as-is a while ago
I ran into a number of dependency issues (see [1]). So, for now I'm
probably just going to use the SAX handlers that I have put together in
my sandbox, to get going and exercise the model without having to do any
big breaking changes in the StAX based loaders.
In the next few days I think I'm going to focus more on the
serializers/serializers to get a complete read/write story in place,
which we can refine later. If you or anybody else is interested in trying
to use the existing loaders to create the scdl4j assembly objects in the
meantime, just go ahead. When it works we can compare and merge and maybe
just deprecate the handlers.
Another thing is should there be a plugable extension mechanism? So for
example a JavaScript container would be able to plug in an extension so
scdl4j can work with <implementation.js>?
Yes, and it needs to cover the writing of the model in addition to the
reading part.
If so I'd like to help with these (though i may not get to it for a week
or
so).
...ant
Cool, there's a lot to do to support the latest SCDL version, so let's
sync up on the list when you're ready. I'll start to create the structure
under scdl4j to host this work.
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
