xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Scott_B...@lotus.com
Subject Re: [DISC] Common "Native" Interfaces???
Date Wed, 04 Apr 2001 16:04:30 GMT

> While a new xml-core project can be just for utilities
> and common files, should we also have a common package (if not
> place -- i.e. CVS module) for common data structures?

I agree that we need this (see my comments on his proposal... if I didn't
say it right, what you are saying is what I intended).  However, I also
think we need to be very conservative about what goes in there.  For one
thing, we want to be careful of bloat.  For another, adding something to a
commons area will be an invitation to perpetuate that interface through the
pipeline... which can cause nasty dependency problems, and will be a
nightmare if the API is not stable.

> Perhaps this stuff
> belongs under org.apache.xml but at the moment we have the
> serialize subpackage under there which is a specific impl
> of XML serializers. So re-using the .xml package would
> require some cleanup.

I don't know why this is a problem.  The serialize stuff is under
org.apache.xml.serialize.  Put xni under org.apache.xml.xni.  There may
also be a org.apache.xml.dtm.  In Xalan we have an org.apache.xml.utils,
for general purpose utilities (though this needs to be cleaned up a bit).

BTW, I think we should consider deprecating the org.apache.xml.serialize
stuff in favor of the JAXP 1.1
javax.xml.transform.TransformerFactory#newTransformer() API, which gives
you the ability to do serialization.

> the current XNI streaming info-set stuff could
> be .pipeline

I don't think you want to get that generic.  An event interface is only one
way to plug pipeline units.


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