commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stephen Colebourne" <>
Subject Re: [xmlio] Naming
Date Sat, 09 Oct 2004 11:19:59 GMT
Please see the commons charter on naming. Paraphrasing it says that "names
should be boring and functional, not clever". jazz is clever ;-(  The
reasoning is to remove one more barrier to adopting the component. (Note
that not every commons component follows the rule, betwixt being a good

maybe [sax] for input? (commons-sax)
or [fromsax] - (commons-fromsax)
maybe [toxml] for output? (commons-toxml)
or [tosax]? (commons-tosax)

It depends on whether you want to scope/limit yourself to just sax.

Should you split? It depends on whether people who use one half are likely
to use the other really.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Florey" <>
> After doing the xmlio google thing I agree that this name is really used
> so many projects that it would be worth to find another one even if I like
> it.
> As 'xmlio' consists of two parts (importer / exporter) I would recommend
> separating them into two tiny components in order to increase reusability.
> My favourite name for the importer (sax augmentation) would be 'jazz'. As
> you need a sax to play jazz... (Or is it 'just augmented super sax'??)
> The exporter could be simply called XMLWriter as this is what it does.
> Finally I'd like to say that I don't think Digester and xmlio are direct
> competitors as they are very different: xmlio is a simple sax extension
> has nothing to do with mapping xml to java objects.
> So I don't think we get trouble here.
> Regards,
> Daniel

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message