[izpack-devel] Updating to latest version of NanoXML

[Bartz, Klaus]

Hi Elmar,
at the first look nice and petite. 
A deeper look later...

Thanks

Klaus

>-----Original Message-----
>From: izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de
>[mailto:izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de]On Behalf Of Elmar Grom
>Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 6:33 PM
>To: izpack-devel at lists.berlios.de
>Subject: Re: [izpack-devel] Updating to latest version of NanoXML
>
>
>Hi Klaus,
>
>as I had mentioned before, I am willing to contribute a chunk 
>of code that I
>am using for several years to work with javax.xml.*.
>
>You can have a look at it and see how well it would fit into 
>IzPack. I am
>not sure how well it represents NanoXML calls, so some 
>massaging might be
>necessary to make insertion easier. In general it makes working with
>javax.xml a snap. Most problems collapse into a single line 
>call to one of
>the XMLHelper classes.
>
>cheers
>
>	Elmar
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de
>[mailto:izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de]On Behalf Of Bartz, Klaus
>Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 12:14 AM
>To: izpack-devel at lists.berlios.de
>Subject: Re: [izpack-devel] Updating to latest version of NanoXML
>
>
>Hi all,
>will be nice if we change to an xml parser which is included in
>the VM. I have played a little bit with javax.xml.*. For me it seems
>so that with a flat wrapper the changes in IzPack have not to be
>to big.
>To declare a leadtime has the chance to define the used api (if a
>wrapper will be used) and discuss it.
>In my installations NanoXML is not used only in the common base of
>IzPack else in all my custom code which needs a configuration via an
>xml file. I will do the needed changes there because I am certain
>that it is the right way.
>If we find no api for a common wrapper I will do it for my own code.
>
>We should see that a change creates an incompatibility for all users
>which have custom configuration files. This has to be communicated
>with big letter at a good seeing place.
>
>May be we can create a todo list or roadmap for the next but one
>release.
>
>Cheers
>
>Klaus
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de
>>[mailto:izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de]On Behalf Of 
>Julien Ponge
>>Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 8:20 AM
>>To: elmar at grom.net; izpack-devel at lists.berlios.de
>>Subject: Re: [izpack-devel] Updating to latest version of NanoXML
>>
>>
>>Hi guys,
>>
>>I would add that we can simplify things by combining DOM + XPath,
>>which avoids many boilerplate nested loops to retrieve data. I am in
>>favor or the javax.xml.* solution rather than using JDom (or Dom4j
>>which I like very much). As Elmar said, the reason is that it wouldn't
>>add bytes to the installers while JDom would, even if it is an
>>appealing library.
>>
>>I suggest that we put this item for 3.11.0.
>>
>>Cheers
>>_______________________________________________
>>izpack-devel mailing list
>>izpack-devel at lists.berlios.de
>>https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/izpack-devel
>>
>_______________________________________________
>izpack-devel mailing list
>izpack-devel at lists.berlios.de
>https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/izpack-devel
>