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

RE: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)

• To: "Miles Sabin" <miles@m...>,"xml-dev" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• From: "Michael Fitzgerald" <mike@w...>
• Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 07:56:31 -0700
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <200209202046.53821.miles@m...>

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

• References:
  • Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
    • From: Miles Sabin <miles@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Greenspun's tenth law rears its head: was InnerXmlis like printf (WAS: Underwhelmed)
• Next by Date: RE: Greenspun's tenth law rears its head: was InnerXmlis like printf (WAS: Underwhelmed)
• Previous by thread: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Next by thread: XLink/XHTML consensus?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread