[jdom-interest] Re: parser-next-gen goals, plan, and requirements
Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus
Scott_Boag at lotus.com
Wed Jul 12 09:52:11 PDT 2000
> toughts about an XPath implementation on JDOM.
If JDOM would implement a simple, read-only subset of the DOM interfaces,
they could use Xalan2's XPath implementation, to good effect and
performance, I think. It seems like they could implement this subset with
little or no effect on performance. If you want details on what that
subset would be, please let me know. If the JDOM folk have good ideas on
what it would take to make the Xalan2 XPath acceptable to them, I would be
glad to work with them.
-scott
"Jeffrey
Rodriguez" To: general at xml.apache.org
<jeffreyr_97 at ho cc: (bcc: Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus)
tmail.com> Subject: Re: parser-next-gen goals, plan, and requirements
07/12/2000
04:52 AM
Please respond
to general
Hi Jason, Hi Brett,
Yes, I think that we need a pluggable architecture that would allow:
- pluggable components ( validators, XPath APIs, DOM like api, mini parser
api.
- configurability, so we get the set of tools required for the
job.
I think this requirement are already in the list ( let us check).
What are your toughts about an XPath implementation on JDOM. What
is the status of JDOM, last time I visit your site was just after
your presentation at the Mountain View Java user's group back in
April.
Thanks,
Jeffrey Rodriguez
IBM Silicon Valley
ps.
Brett, your book is great, it has some of the best up to date
coverage of the Xerces APIs, a must for our beginner users.
>From: Jason Hunter <jhunter at acm.org>
>Reply-To: general at xml.apache.org
>To: general at xml.apache.org
>Subject: Re: parser-next-gen goals, plan, and requirements
>Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 22:56:29 -0700
>
>Arnaud Le Hors wrote:
> >
> > I actually simply don't understand the requirement about JDOM. DOM is
an
> > API, we need to provide classes that implement the API. This is true
for
> > JDOM. It's not an API. It's a set of classes that include a builder
that
> > works on SAX. So as long as we support SAX, which definitely is a
> > requirement, we're all set on that front. Let's leave the debate of
> > whether JDOM is a good thing or not outside of this project.
>
>I'd like to see Spinnaker/XRI/whatevercodename come equipped with a
>powerful and pluggable architecture that allowed for better JDOM
>implementations than what the simple SAXBuilder provides. We have plans
>for a deferred implementation (done using subclasses) but this requires
>closer iteraction with the parser. A new well-designed and
>understandable parser sounds wonderful.
>
>-jh-
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster at xml.apache.org
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe at xml.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: general-help at xml.apache.org
>
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster at xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe at xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help at xml.apache.org
More information about the jdom-interest
mailing list