Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> -----Original Message----- > From: Leigh Dodds [mailto:ldodds@i...] > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 12:45 PM > To: Dylan Walsh; Xml-Dev > Subject: JAXP and Java XML APIs (was RE: difference bet. > xerces and crimson) > > I can only attribute this '3 months saving' to the difficulty > in the DOM > model. From my own experiences the amount of code I have to write > could have been greatly reduced by a means to query a DOM using > XPath; something which seems to be on the way. I'd be very interested in hearing a more detailed explanation of the "difficulty in the DOM model". (I'm hopelessly biased, having spent the last four years on the DOM WG -- but trying to be open minded!). I'd *guess* that the parts of the DOM model that people find difficult include: - Text nodes (a nice hack for mixed content, just another hassle everywhere else) - CDATA sections (the InfoSet, perhaps wisely, treats them as syntax sugar) - The fact that entity reference nodes are exposed in the tree rather than being hidden (again, the InfoSet probably did it right ... but the DOM WG couldn't figure out a clean way to both hide entity references from "browsers" and expose them to "editors"). - The long delay in support for the various stuff in DTDs, such as attribute types, notation declarations, etc.) - The long delay in support for a query mechanism other than GetElementsByTagName() - All the stuff in Java that's not in generic CORBA IDL. (There's not a whole lot the DOM WG could do about this, is there? Maybe the Java bindings could have exploited Java-isms more???) But these are just my own prejudices, and I'd love to hear about other perspectives on what "gotchas" the DOM throws at them. -
|
