Hey, Jan-Wijbrand Kolman wrote: > I'm about to work a bit on z3c.schema2json [1]. As has been briefly > discussed before (a while ago [2]), z3c. schema2json is so similar to > z3c.schema2xml [3] in what it does and how it does it, that I wonder > about merging the two packages somehow. > > One way to do this - maybe - is to use named registrations for the > (de)serialization adapters. The name could reflect the serialization > "mode" - for example "xml" or "json". > > But maybe there're other ideas to achieve this? Or, could it be that > merging has no real benefit?
I'm still not sure there'd be a real benefit. It depends on how much code would end up being shared. If a lot of code is shared it might make sense to merge them (or factor the code out into a general schema-based serialization and deserialization framework). If it turns out your improvements to z3c.schema2json also make sense in z3c.schema2xml then that's an argument in favor of sharing code between them. Regards, Martijn _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
