[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Effective DOM (was RE: Effective XML)

• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Effective DOM (was RE: Effective XML)
• From: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@S...>
• Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 10:17:33 -0500

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fred L. Drake, Jr. [mailto:fdrake@a...]
> Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 9:40 AM
> To: Leigh Dodds
> Cc: xml-dev
> Subject: RE:  Effective XML

 
>   Otherwise the DOM seems incredibly painful to use directly.

[Disclaimer: I was an editor of DOM Level 1, so forgive any whiny
defensiveness.]

DOM was indeed driven by the requirements to be an HTML browser API, and
there is no doubt that JAXB-like tools are far more effective for generating
application-specific object models (assuming you have a schema!). But in my
biased opinion, it seems like a pretty straightforward way to use the
generic XML object model.  It will be MORE useful when Level 3 defines
standard load/save, validation, and XPath access interfaces are defined, of
course. 

I'd be interested in hearing concrete examples of why people find the DOM
painful to use, in what ways JDOM and dom4j seem more friendly (besides
their native Java idioms, of course), etc. I have three motivations for
soliciting this input:

- Improving the standard DOM down the road 
- Defining convenience layers on top of the W3C DOM that minimize the pain
- Defining and documenting DOM gotchas, workarounds, best practices, etc.

Thoughts?

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Effective DOM (was RE: Effective XML)
    • From: "Leigh Dodds" <ldodds@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: The use of XML syntax in XML Query
• Next by Date: Re: The use of XML syntax in XML Query
• Previous by thread: RE: W3C's five new XQuery/Xpath2 working drafts - Sti ll missing Updates
• Next by thread: RE: Effective DOM (was RE: Effective XML)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread