From graffito-dev-return-387-apmail-incubator-graffito-dev-archive=www.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Wed Aug 03 08:58:03 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-graffito-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 46323 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2005 08:58:03 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Aug 2005 08:58:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 38238 invoked by uid 500); 3 Aug 2005 08:58:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact graffito-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: graffito-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list graffito-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 38207 invoked by uid 99); 3 Aug 2005 08:58:00 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Aug 2005 01:58:00 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_BY_IP,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of christophe.lombart@gmail.com designates 64.233.182.197 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.182.197] (HELO nproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.182.197) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Aug 2005 01:57:50 -0700 Received: by nproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id d4so11990nfe for ; Wed, 03 Aug 2005 01:57:57 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=VcmOfZGIM0fY/mgZFOe/184XVhaqm9TsOqvRfGyIa3Io5CzmuwhD2ro1LnGdzOckknTeHymBaZ8Dxpdg0ymFi0QBxpHqNM9fEwy8hpPnh8xwpJfUQ8dqeDiY7inURimq6UmC4qGMwv2zbpaiSjbBDstVEP73FGc5K8z+nRykXzo= Received: by 10.48.250.16 with SMTP id x16mr9620nfh; Wed, 03 Aug 2005 01:57:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.48.249.5 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Aug 2005 01:57:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3b728ee9050803015769e479b8@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 10:57:57 +0200 From: Christophe Lombart To: graffito-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [jcr-mapping] persistence of the mapping model In-Reply-To: <42EFE7B6.6090801@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <42E959B2.5030302@gmx.de> <3b728ee9050731134776c1cb62@mail.gmail.com> <42ED4ABD.8090109@gmx.de> <42EFAC51.2020104@gmx.de> <3b728ee90508021119215fd88a@mail.gmail.com> <42EFE7B6.6090801@gmx.de> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N 2005/8/2, Sandro B=F6hme : > Christophe Lombart wrote: >=20 > >+0 because I think tools like Digester is so simple to use in such case. > >Please, make a small document on the xml schema to use for the mapping. > > > >Christophe. > > > > > Do I understand it right, that you vote +0 for XML-schema and Digester > is simple to use with > XML-schema? > What should the document contain? >=20 No - Let me resume why I'm agains tools like XmlBeans, JAXB, ... and XML schema : * Thoses tools are generating java classes and sometime it is difficult to change the class object structure. We will have a few number of java classes to read the config file. So write by hand thoses classes is not a big deal. Futhermore, using a pre-processing in order to just read a simple config file is a little bit heavy - no :-) ? * The mapping file should be very simple - I hope it will be otherwise the framework will not be used :-). So, a simple DTD is sufficiant. Xml schema becomes interesting for more complex grammar. See Jackrabbit, Hibernante, OJB, ... all these frameworks are using very simple DTD. * We need to read the mapping file and cache it in memory (in an object graph). So, Digester is (for me) one of the best tools to do it. Others framework become interesting when your update the xml file content. * See http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-commons/Digester/WhyUseDigester. Give 2 days, I hope to commit a small example (before my upcoming vacations= ).=20 Christophe=20 > Sandro >=20 > > > >2005/8/2, Oliver Kiessler : > > > > > >>>Regarding XML-schema: > >>>I think we will need a definition for the XML file somehow or other. B= e > >>>it in writing form, a DTD or a > >>>XML-schema. The schema is the more advanced than DTD. The user will ha= ve > >>>a valid XML file as > >>>early as possible. I think the writing form of explaining the definiti= on > >>>is much more work if it has the same > >>>quality as the schema. > >>> > >>>I think we need a XML-schema ballot in order to be able to close the > >>>ballot about the persistence > >>>technology of the mapping model. > >>> > >>>++ Please vote if you think we need a XML schema for the XML file of t= he > >>>mapping model. ++ > >>> > >>> > >>ok. I think you have a point here, therefore I vote +1. > >> > >>oliver > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >=20 >