[jdom-interest] serialization Push toward a 1.0 API

[Elliotte Rusty Harold]

At 6:39 PM -0700 4/9/02, Jason Hunter wrote:


>* Make sure we have a story for serialization.  How much work is it to
>support
>   serialization across current and future JDOM versions?
>   See "serialVersionUID" thread especially Peter V. Gadjokov's remarks
>at
>
>http://lists.denveronline.net/lists/jdom-interest/2000-September/subject.html
>   It may be OK to worry about fast short-term serialization only.
>
>Personally, I don't think we need to worry about long-term
>serialization.  That's what XML is for.  When you send XML over the wire
>and care about extensibility in the future, you should send it as XML
>and not as a Java-based serialized copy of the document.
>

I tend to agree in principal. However, I do think that if this is our 
philosophy we need to eat the whole hog; i.e. no JDOM classes 
implement Serializable, short term or long term. If the classes are 
going to implement Serializable, they should implement it correctly.
-- 

+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo at metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
|          The XML Bible, 2nd Edition (Hungry Minds, 2001)           |
|             http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/bible2/              |
|   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764547607/cafeaulaitA/   |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|  Read Cafe au Lait for Java News:  http://www.cafeaulait.org/      |
|  Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/    |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+