commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benedikt Ritter <>
Subject Re: [SCXML] Proposal to move to Java 8 minimum and drop/replace XML/XPath support with JSON
Date Wed, 09 Dec 2015 12:01:20 GMT
Hello Ate,

2015-12-09 10:15 GMT+01:00 Ate Douma <>:

> Since early this year the progress and development of Commons SCXML 2.0 has
> severely declined because of two major technical hurdles, and thereafter of
> both motivation and lack of time:
> - The SCXML XML/XPath datamodel support has been dropped from the final
> W3C SCXML 1.0 specification [1], because of too many functional and
> semantic
> complications and limitation, as well as lack of interest for implementing
> it.
> The implementation of the XML/XPath datamodel in Commons SCXML has been
> problematic for precisely the same reasons.
> And not being able to provide such implementation properly by us (Commons
> SCXML) actually has been one (final) argument for dropping it from the
> specification...
> - The implementation of the Javascript datamodel support based on the
> old/outdated Rhino Javascript engine in Java 7 and below, turned out to be
> quite difficult. While it turns out to be much easier and reliable, but
> different, with the new Nashorn Javascript engine in Java 8+.
> After bringing this first up on the user@ list earlier this week, I now
> want to
> propose the following major changes to revive the further development
> towards
> Commons SCXML 2.0:
> - drop the support for XML/XPath based datamodel, and instead introduce a
> much
>   easier to implement and support JSON datamodel as alternative, for all
> current
>   Commons SCXML support 'languages': JEXL, Groovy and Javascript.
> - bump the minimum Java version to 8 so we can leverage and only need to
> support
>   the Nashorn Javascript engine
> The only user response so far on user@ is fully in favor of these changes,
> and both myself and Woonsan Ko are motivated to continue developing and
> completing the goals for Commons SCXML 2.0 based on these changes.
> If nobody here has strong arguments against the above proposal (and
> assuming
> lazy consensus otherwise), we would like to start on these changes shortly,
> before the end of the year.

I'm all for upgrading to Java 8 if it eases the development of Commons
SCXML. Go for it.


> Kind regards,
> Ate Douma
> Woonsan Ko
> [1]
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message