Andrew,
just wondering what XMl parser you might be using, as I'd like to have a brief
look at its 'Serializer' interface. Can you please point me to some
documentation ?
Regards
Werner
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:16:49 +0100, Werner Guttmann wrote:
>Hi Fernando,
>
>there isn't a problem with Xerces per se, but (as stated by Andrew) there's
>people out there that dislike Xerces for various reasons (speed, memory
>footprint, etc.), and hence would want to use a different parser.
>
>Personally, I think that we should try to remove the Xerces dependency, but I
>am not sure whether creating a new Serializer interface is the best was
>forward. Let's hear what people like Keith have got to say ...
>
>Regards
>Werner
>
>PS ! No HTML messages, please !
>
>--Original Message Text---
>From: Fernando González Cortés
>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:33:13 +0100
>
>I thing flexibility is great.
>
>I'm currently a develper of the gvSIG project which needs Castor as I need
>air, ¿¿¿is there any problem with the Xerces???
>
>cheers
>Fernando González Cortés
> gvSIG development team
> http://www.gvsig.gva.es
> IVER T.I.
> Valencia - Spain
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Andrew Fawcett
>To: castor-dev@exolab.org
>Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 11:10 AM
>Subject: [castor-dev] Dependency on Xerces in Castor XML?
>
>
>Hi,
>
>Currently the Configuration class allows the developer to provide an
>alternative serializer so long as its based on the Xerces Serializer
>interface. Since
>we at CODA are try to remove Xerces from our products and use the default JVM
>parser and serializer, having Castor locked into Xerces this way is
kind
>of fly in the ointment.
>
>I was wondering what peoples thoughts where on abstracting Castor' serializer
>requirements into its own Serializer interface. The existing configuration
>property would then do a better job of allowing developers to then provide
>truly any serialiser they want. Of course default behaviour would be as it is
>now. So Castor would ship with a default implementation this new interface
>that works with Xerces. Thoughts? Anybody have any objections if I start
to
>look into this within the next few weeks?
>
>Cheers,
>
>Andrew Fawcett
>"The Mad Brit"
>
>
>
>
>The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged.
>It may not be disclosed to, or used by, anyone other than the addressee.
If
>you receive this message in error, please advise us immediately.
>
>Internet emails are not necessarily secure. CODA does not accept
>responsibility for changes to any email which occur after the email has been
>sent.
>Attachments to this email may contain software viruses, which could damage
>your systems. CODA has checked the attachments for viruses before
>sending, but you should virus-check them before opening.
>
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send mail to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
> unsubscribe castor-dev
>
>
>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------
If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
unsubscribe castor-dev
