[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
Miles Sabin wrote: > I'm afraid I don't find this example particularly compelling, Not everyone will agree, but this is what I like about XOM: It is underwhelming. Take another tiny example: import nu.xom.*; public class Tiny { public static void main(String[] args) { Element tiny = new Element("tiny"); Document doc = new Document(tiny); System.out.println(doc.getStringForm()); } } What I mean is that in 3 lines (4 with import), XOM produces a well-formed XML document. How many lines would it take to do that with a Java implantation of SAX or DOM? Economy of keystrokes is important to me -- not the only consideration, but important to me. I suspect other care about that too. XOM passes the test of: * simplicity * readability * typeability in my book. I guess I like it for the same reasons I like RELAX NG's compact syntax. > because it invites a comparison with, > > public class Date > { > public static void main(String[] args) > { > System.out.print( > "<?xml version="1.0"?>\n"+ > " <date type="ISO">\n"+ > " <year>2002</year>\n"+ > " <month>09</month>\n"+ > " <day>20</day>\n"+ > "</date>\n" > ); > } > } > Sure, but, in my little micro tutorial, which was not meant to be compelling, all I am gave XOM was a few names; it handles well-formedness in the serialization for me. I like that too. I'm going to give XOM a fighting chance. Mike
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|