xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: parser-next-gen goals, plan, and requirements
Date Wed, 12 Jul 2000 13:02:47 GMT
Brett McLaughlin wrote:
> 
> Arnaud Le Hors wrote:
> >
> > About the requirements. I've tried no less than 3 times to send a
> > message out but it seems to always go into a black hole. (James, are you
> > hiding somewhere in there deleting my messages as they go through? Just
> > kidding! :-)
> > Here I go again:
> >
> > At the minimum we need to have the same as Xerces 1. These are:
> >
> > Validating XML 1.0
> > Namespaces
> > SAX2
> > DOM Level 2
> > XML Schemas
> 
> Is SAX 1 support worth including? I'm -0, but not sure. Since we are
> talking size, you could simply implement SAX2, and include ParserAdapter
> and call it SAX 1.0. Any opinions? Not a huge deal, but as long as we're
> laying out requirements...

-1 on SAX1
 
> >
> > In addition, I guess it's a given that we all want:
> >
> > Modularity, meaning that one should be able to have a jar containing the
> > bare minimum XML parser for instance.
> 
> I think it's worthwhile to drill into what this means. What exactly is
> "the bare minimum XML parser?" Does that mean it just parses XML? Does
> it output events (SAX)? What kind of APIs should we expose?
> 
> >
> > Also, performance should be the best-of-breed ACROSS ALL JIT's (not just
> > Hotspot).
> 
> This is fair - we do need to make a decision on 1.1 JVM's. Personally, I
> don't think we need support - in other words, I'm for WeakReferences and
> Collections, because they (a) make things easier to understand and (b)
> could possibly really help with performance and memory. I agree with
> James Xerces 1.x is great for 1.1.

-1 on supporting 1.1
+1 on supporting all 1.2+ JVM (not just hotspot)
 
> >
> > What else?
> >
> > Who's keeping track of the requirements that we come up with? We should
> > make this as open as possible at this point, have someone make a
> > compilation, and have a discussion on what we agree on.
> 
> It might be nice, at a minimum, to have a web page at Xerces with an
> ongoing list. It can be rough and ugly, but at least we can all wake up
> and see that condensed instead of missing something reading through 100
> mails in the wee hours...
> 
> >
> > (Hint: this is an opportunity for someone new to volunteer. Please,
> > don't make me do it, it would end up being labeled as "IBM's
> > requirements" ;-)
> 
> Oh, how I'd love to volunteer here... Just too freakin' busy. I wonder
> if there is any tool at collab.net or somewhere similar that does
> requirements tracking? (Jason, are you listening? Anything here?) It
> would be great for newcomers to be able to see these, and for us to be
> able to "check them off" as we meet them.

Asking for volunteers is pointless: just do something that barely
compiles, create the itch an people will jump to scratch it. This is how
it works when the community is perceived open.

-- 
Stefano Mazzocchi      One must still have chaos in oneself to be
                          able to give birth to a dancing star.
<stefano@apache.org>                             Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
 Missed us in Orlando? Make it up with ApacheCON Europe in London!
------------------------- http://ApacheCon.Com ---------------------



Mime
View raw message