On Wed, 17 Nov 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Well, the package name for an earlier version of that DOM was > com.ibm.xml.dom, so making it org.apache.xml.dom would make a certain > amount of sense... > > However, it's worth pointing out that you may wind up wanting to make > multiple implementations of the DOM available, tuned for different > purposes. You may or may not want to consider that when picking your > package name.
We currently really use a subset of DOM. It definately would be nice to see a performance focused DOM-Lite that can be used under serious stress. Although, I would be looking more towards a C/C++/perl implementation, but that doesn't mean it could not apply to the java version as well. -- Sander "wishing he had more time" van Zoest [EMAIL PROTECTED] High Geek (858) 623-7442 MP3.com, Inc. http://www.mp3.com/
