Mailing-List: contact abdera-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: abdera-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of rooneg@gmail.com designates
 64.233.182.186 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=h6IzOHFsHjjQcj0Kk9hEMa94LVmsk32gIyRZmGyXII6ExXHKBe+Ig7e5/+AKUz7kWJ/ucrF22db++vyQpiwqkf8i+RTu/F59QkNcOLppDE/nNMGvcSdyVyxLF/fgrpttiCzlK0+iEdOjGfkN1H8KxNvR+GHK9StqLfRdjZED8bA=
Message-ID: <7edfeeef0610281015r33918a61gdd13dbdf97af86ef@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 13:15:57 -0400
From: "Garrett Rooney" <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net>
Sender: rooneg@gmail.com
To: abdera-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r468598 - in
 /incubator/abdera/java/trunk/extensions/src/main/java/org/apache/abdera/ext/opensearch:
 OpenSearchV11Helper.java Query.java
In-Reply-To: <20061028003617.EA7421A9846@eris.apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20061028003617.EA7421A9846@eris.apache.org>

On 10/27/06, jmsnell@apache.org <jmsnell@apache.org> wrote:

> OpenSearch v1.1 feed extension element implementation.  This demonstrates an alternative approach
> to handling extension elements that is independent of the underlying Axiom implementation. The
> other OpenSearch v1.0 stuff should be refactored to match this.

I'm not sure I like this new approach.  On one hand, yes, it does
allow manipulation of extension elements without knowledge of the
underlying parser implementation.  On the other, it means that you
have to treat the extension elements specially, where a big part of
what I like about Abdera is that extension elements can be treated
just like any other type of element.  If we're going to migrate to a
non-axiom based parser anyway, is it really necessary to bend over
backwards this way to break the connection?  It seems like we should
be able to make the parser implementation unaware of the exact
implementation class used for a given Element, with a little bit of
work.

-garrett