xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus" <Scott_B...@lotus.com>
Subject Re: parser-next-gen goals, plan, and requirements
Date Wed, 12 Jul 2000 16:52:11 GMT

> toughts about an XPath implementation on JDOM.

If JDOM would implement a simple, read-only subset of the DOM interfaces,
they could use Xalan2's XPath implementation, to good effect and
performance, I think.  It seems like they could implement this subset with
little or no effect on performance.  If you want details on what that
subset would be, please let me know.  If the JDOM folk have good ideas on
what it would take to make the Xalan2 XPath acceptable to them, I would be
glad to work with them.


                    Rodriguez"             To:     general@xml.apache.org                
                    <jeffreyr_97@ho        cc:     (bcc: Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus)        
                    tmail.com>             Subject:     Re: parser-next-gen goals, plan,
and requirements            
                    04:52 AM                                                             
                    Please respond                                                       
                    to general                                                           

Hi Jason, Hi Brett,

Yes, I think that we need a pluggable architecture that would allow:

- pluggable components ( validators, XPath APIs, DOM like api, mini parser
- configurability, so we get the set of tools required for the

I think this requirement are already in the list ( let us check).

What are your toughts about an XPath implementation on JDOM. What
is the status of JDOM, last time I visit your site was just after
your presentation at the Mountain View Java user's group back in

              Jeffrey Rodriguez
              IBM Silicon Valley

Brett, your book is great, it has some of the best up to date
coverage of the Xerces APIs, a must for our beginner users.

>From: Jason Hunter <jhunter@acm.org>
>Reply-To: general@xml.apache.org
>To: general@xml.apache.org
>Subject: Re: parser-next-gen goals, plan, and requirements
>Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 22:56:29 -0700
>Arnaud Le Hors wrote:
> >
> > I actually simply don't understand the requirement about JDOM. DOM is
> > API, we need to provide classes that implement the API. This is true
> > JDOM. It's not an API. It's a set of classes that include a builder
> > works on SAX. So as long as we support SAX, which definitely is a
> > requirement, we're all set on that front. Let's leave the debate of
> > whether JDOM is a good thing or not outside of this project.
>I'd like to see Spinnaker/XRI/whatevercodename come equipped with a
>powerful and pluggable architecture that allowed for better JDOM
>implementations than what the simple SAXBuilder provides.  We have plans
>for a deferred implementation (done using subclasses) but this requires
>closer iteraction with the parser.  A new well-designed and
>understandable parser sounds wonderful.
>In case of troubles, e-mail:     webmaster@xml.apache.org
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:          general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

In case of troubles, e-mail:     webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail:          general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org

View raw message