commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon Kitching <>
Subject Re: [digester] initial code for Digester2.0
Date Thu, 03 Feb 2005 04:09:31 GMT
On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 05:48 -0800, Reid Pinchback wrote:
> One section of the release notes says:
>     The Digester now *always* uses a namespace-aware xml parser.
> I was wondering why this is.  There are a lot of XML parsers
> out there, and some of them have done things like trade
> namespace awareness for performance.  If somebody has a
> application where namespaces aren't an issue, why should
> they be limited to only using a namespace-aware parser?
> Not something that seems like an important issue if you are
> just using a Digester to process some kind of app config
> file, but is an issue if processing streams of XML data
> is fundamentally what the app is about.

Supporting namespaces in an xml parser seems very simple to me. I think
it much more likely that only antique and unmaintained parsers fail to
support namespaces. And people who are determined to use antique and
unmaintained parsers can just stick with digester 1.x as far as I am
concerned. I'm not pushing for digester to remove non-namespace-aware
support - just digester2!

Removing code that handles non-namespace parsers from digester
simplifies the code and reduces the library size. It also pushes users
to write their code correctly; code that processes XML and doesn't
handle namespaces is fundamentally broken and we shouldn't be providing
tools that encourage people to write broken code.

However if you can give an example of a modern and maintained xml parser
that deliberately doesn't support namespaces in order to improve
performance or reduce footprint, I will gladly reconsider.

Or of course the consensus here favours supporting broken parsers :-)



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

View raw message