ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <>
Subject Re: Proposed API Refactoring
Date Tue, 05 Dec 2000 02:03:06 GMT
At 07:57  4/12/00 -0600, Simeon H.K. Fitch wrote:
>What I'm looking for is a construction API that doesn't use SAX or
>DOM. If we want a general approach to generating Ant datamodels, why
>remain so w3c/XML centric?

no reason other than that they have similar demands. A general construction
API should be available but in many cases it may be useful to work at a
layer before that. ie XSLT/CSS/other templating frontends can easily be
coerced to produce SAX as can various other apis .. ie JDOM/DOM. If you
really want to use a general construction API you can use that aswell.

>> Instead of having N project
>> builders it would be better to have N SAX producers and one SAX Project
>> Builder. The reason for this is that there are already many SAX converters
>I don't see the benefit to having N SAX producers over N project

Because they are not maintained by us and they already exist ;) ie there is
DOM->SAX, JDOM->SAX, LDAP->SAX, DB->SAX, SAX+XSLT->SAX filters out there
already and they work fine. If we were to maintain them then I guess it
would be better to do it via ProjectBuilders but we may aswell use what is
already available elsewhere ;)

>I would think that in the long term one would go through
>more contortions trying to generate the appropriate SAX events rather
>than directly building the project. Take the case where you want to
>store the project in a relational database, where you have separate
>tables for each data type (Target, Task, etc). Going to the w3c/XML
>SAX event API rather than instantiating the node types directly, or
>going through a factory seems a little weird.

right. Either way is possible - whatever floats your boat ;) I just think
that *->SAX->Project is easier atm.

>> out there and it means that the project builder can be easily maintained
>> and there is less chance different input sources causing projects to be
>> built inconsistently.
>Couldn't various SAX producers be just as likely to produce
>inconsitent SAX events as any project builder? 

Possibly - but as they are done by "not Us" we can blame someone else ;)



| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof."                   |
|              - John Kenneth Galbraith               |

View raw message