aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alasdair Nottingham <>
Subject Re: Blueprint NamespaceHandlers: DOM or Stax?
Date Wed, 06 Jan 2010 21:32:31 GMT
The namespace handler support in the blueprint RFC specified to use  
DOM before it was pulled from the 4.2 spec, which is why DOM is used  

The OSGi Alliance is looking at namespace handlers again, I don't have  
a problem with something more modern being used, but I am worried  
about changing if the standard ends up using DOM.


On 6 Jan 2010, at 19:15, The Dweller <> wrote:

> The quick answer is the blueprint parser is using DOM, so ns  
> handlers being
> part of that process also use the same api.
> If the bp parser were rewritten to use stax, then the ns handler  
> interface
> would need updating also.
> Of course, then you'd have to consider if we'd want to maintain some  
> sort of
> compatibility bridge to support the older ns handler dom based  
> interface.
> As ns handlers are associated to their URIs, we could even multiple  
> api
> impls for a given URI, and support a priority ordering for which  
> we'd use..
> What are peoples thoughts, moving the parser over wouldnt be  
> trivial, but
> wouldnt be excessively large either.. maintaining support for the  
> older ns
> handler interface would be a must in the short term at least.. and  
> would
> certainly complicate things a little.
> Regards,
> Ozzy
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 6:59 PM, David Jencks  
> <> wrote:
>> I've been working on converting the xbean-spring namespace handler  
>> to work
>> with blueprint and really wonder why NamespaceHandler is specified  
>> to use
>> DOM rather than Stax.  Is this an historical accident that should be
>> corrected ASAP or is there an actual benefit to using DOM?
>> I haven't looked into the insides of aries blueprint, would it be a  
>> good
>> idea to use stax there also?
>> thanks
>> david jencks

View raw message