commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gary Gregory" <ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com>
Subject RE: [xmlio] Naming
Date Sat, 09 Oct 2004 18:57:27 GMT
Personally, I never like seeing anything with the name "util" in it. In
the past, I've seen such places, be they classes, packages or
directories, end up being dumping grounds. Picking "util", to me, says
"Well, I could not think of a good name for my Foo code, so FooUtils it
is". 

Finding good names can be very hard. 

I do not feel good about criticizing this proposal since I do not have
an alternative. In this case, I have not looked closely this code pile,
so I cannot offer a well though of alternative.

But perhaps I can offer some direction for discussion. Is the pile an
"extension" to SAX? If so, [sax-ext]? A set of callbacks on top of SAX?
[sax-callbacks]? Etc.

Gary

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Stanley [mailto:mstanley@mstanley.net]
> Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2004 11:32
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [xmlio] Naming
> 
> I don't think they should be split.  If it is a library for helping
the
> input/output of XML why separate these into separate projects.  Lets
not
> get carried away with small functional libraries.  There should be a
> limit to the size, purpose.   I mean there has to come a point where
the
> overhead of a new subproject isn't worth the benefit of the logical
> separation of otherwise related classes.
> 
> If the library is
> 1) not a parser
> 2) not an XML marshaller
> 3) not an xml ingester (like digester)
> 4) not a bean serializer
> 
> but rather a utility for inputing and outputting XML documents
> (augmenting SAX with callbacks).
> 
> Then it needs a name that reflects that.  I believe the only name I've
> heard so far that doesn't make me think of one of the above is
> "xmlutil", but then again that will open up the project to be the home
> of other xml utility classes beyond input and output.  Is this a goal
of
> the project?  Perhaps it should be.
> 
> I suggest taking the name "xmlutil" and growing this to an XML utility
> library - in the same family as beanutil, collection, lang, etc.
Input
> and output of XML documents is just one utility that can be offered.
> 
> - Mike
> 
> Gary Gregory wrote:
> 
> >[xml-in] and [xml-out]
> >
> >?
> >
> >Gary
> >
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Stephen Colebourne [mailto:scolebourne@btopenworld.com]
> >>Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2004 04:20
> >>To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> >>Subject: Re: [xmlio] Naming
> >>
> >>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
> >
> >
> >>example)
> >>
> >>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.
> >>
> >>Stephen
> >>
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: "Daniel Florey" <daniel.florey@web.de>
> >>
> >>
> >>>After doing the xmlio google thing I agree that this name is really
> >>>
> >>>
> >used
> >
> >
> >>in
> >>
> >>
> >>>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
> >
> >
> >>but
> >>
> >>
> >>>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: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> >>For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> >For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> >
> >


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message