• To: "'Elliotte Harold'" <elharo@m...>,<kjones@s...>
• Subject: RE: What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: Article on JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
• From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>
• Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 11:23:33 -0000
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <42171F07.8090304@m...>
• Thread-index: AcUWdBErYC3t9wCYRO2V1wSrn3IJ5gAAO7Xg

> 
> I suspect it would be much cleaner to take an approach like 
> Jaxen's. In 
> this approach there's a core set of basic operations that all 
> model-connectors must implement (getChild, getAttribute, getParent, 
> etc.). However most other axes have default implementations 
> that build 
> on top of the basic operations. For instance, the ancestor axis is 
> easily implemented on top of getParent. Thus a minimal implementation 
> only has to provide about 20 fairly straight-forward operations.

This is similar to the design of Saxon's NodeInfo interface, except that in
NodeInfo there are no methods such as getParent and getChild, instead the
provider must implement a minimum set of axes: ancestor, child, attribute.
For other axes, the provider can call on helper implementations provided by
Saxon.

Michael Kay

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: Articleon JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
    • From: Elliotte Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: Article on JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
    • From: Kevin Jones <kjones@s...>

• References:
  • Re: What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: Articleon JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
    • From: Elliotte Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Transmitting XML between different applications
• Next by Date: RE: Substitution Groups
• Previous by thread: Re: What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: Articleon JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
• Next by thread: Re: What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: Article on JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread