[Rails] Re: ROXML versus simple to_xml

2009-01-05 Thread Frederick Cheung
On 5 Jan 2009, at 21:18, Tom Lobato wrote: > > ok, thank you very much!! > I will try it. > > Anyway, What are the "more general problem" you said? > Just the more general case of mapping xml fragments to objects. Fred > On 5 jan, 19:00, Frederick Cheung wrote: >> On 5 Jan 2009, at 20:40, To

[Rails] Re: ROXML versus simple to_xml

2009-01-05 Thread Tom Lobato
ok, thank you very much!! I will try it. Anyway, What are the "more general problem" you said? On 5 jan, 19:00, Frederick Cheung wrote: > On 5 Jan 2009, at 20:40, Tom Lobato wrote: > > > > > > > On 5 jan, 18:16, Frederick Cheung wrote: > >> roxml is trying to solve a more general problem - if

[Rails] Re: ROXML versus simple to_xml

2009-01-05 Thread Frederick Cheung
On 5 Jan 2009, at 20:40, Tom Lobato wrote: > > > > On 5 jan, 18:16, Frederick Cheung wrote: >> roxml is trying to solve a more general problem - if you models >> aren't >> activerecord models then they are not going to have a particularly >> useful to_xml on it (the time i used it was generat

[Rails] Re: ROXML versus simple to_xml

2009-01-05 Thread Tom Lobato
On 5 jan, 18:16, Frederick Cheung wrote: > roxml is trying to solve a more general problem - if you models aren't   > activerecord models then they are not going to have a particularly   > useful to_xml on it (the time i used it was generated xml to pass to a   > webservice) Sorry my bad engli

[Rails] Re: ROXML versus simple to_xml

2009-01-05 Thread Frederick Cheung
On 5 Jan 2009, at 20:08, Tom Lobato wrote: > > > How they differ? > > Does the to_xml method of the classes array/hash/object is based on > ROXML lib? > As I see in http://roxml.rubyforge.org/#quickstart, roxml needs we > define the class (class Book in the guide) before to convert a object > to