tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Todd <>
Subject Re: XML configuration revisited
Date Tue, 12 Oct 1999 00:09:52 GMT

agreed. having an agreed upon dtd before anything else
can be done is very short sighted. i've seen quite a
few projects get in very tight loops on that very topic.

by going xml, validated or not, we at least have a config
format which should be easy to change later on when we
know we have to ... since we don't have to write the parser.

we need an xml dtd to start the juices flowing, hence
my submition of tomcat server.xml (the tags have changed
a bit since we've last spoken but the goal is the same)
as some that works at one level and should be easy enough
to shape into whatever we choose moving forward.

bigger picture, i still believe we should start small
and grow this the smallish and understandable components
perspective vs the top-down container perspective. it
will have to be that way for any fast moving and open
(ie easily embraces new technologies) architecture ... to
do othewise would be a never ending spiral.

i'm still game and have not changed my opinions on this
matter a bit ... but open to ideas.

hope this helps,

- james

Jan-Henrik Haukeland wrote:
> Ben Laurie <> writes:
> > James Todd wrote:
> > >
> > > the hosting system need not know or be exposed to the
> > > component details but instead provided the bare minimum
> > > needed to establish the relationship and delegate the
> > > work to the component. the work is in definining the
> > > interface amongst the container and the component.
> >
> > I'm finding that a little difficult to parse, but assuming I've
> > understood you, I think I agree. However, I suspect that all you've done
> > is restated the problem without getting us any closer to a solution.
> On the contrary, at least James did a good architectural stab
> at getting at one solution
>         (
> I do feel that James is right (also) when he said that it was the lack
> of code that sort of damped down the discussion. It's only possible to
> discuss the "emperors new clothes" that far. BTW AFAI remember, the
> discussion went much farther than discussing DTD's which is (and to an
> extent should be) only a _minor_ thing in this problem domain.
> --
> Jan-Henrik Haukeland
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message