[izpack-devel] Updating to latest version of NanoXML
elmar at grom.net
Mon Jan 8 18:30:01 CET 2007
well, supporting versions before 1.3 is a thing of the past. This was indeed
originally the major reason for using NanoXML but this restriction does not
exist any more.
I don't know what changes and improvements have taken place in NanoXML and
again, I don't want to talk it down. However, the present version has
parsing difficulties in various situations. There are difficulties with
extra spaces and line breaks for example. Not that these things are
prohibitive but if we would consider investing the effort for an upgrade, I
would feel better if we went to the javax implementation.
Besides, we had a discussion just recently about the size if an installer.
This is particularly important to those of us who provided downloadable
installations. The change would also give us an opportunity to remove code
from the installer.
I have heard the arguments how difficult it is to work with DOM before. I am
working exclusively with it and I just cannot agree with that view point.
The few things that are a bit inconvenient, because you might have to run a
loop, I have placed in a utility class. This collapses such actions into
single line calls. I don't know what else one could ask for.
From: izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de
[mailto:izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de]On Behalf Of Stefan
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 12:13 AM
To: izpack-devel at lists.berlios.de
Subject: Re: [izpack-devel] Updating to latest version of NanoXML
some time ago there was a discussion on this list that favoured NanoXML in
order to stay compatible
with Java 1.3, Java 1.2, ... I think this argument is still valid.
I did update my private IzPack version to the latested NanoXML release
because it solves my original
problem (the character not being kept). Until now I do not experience
(Admittedly I did no extensive testing, yet.)
In addition, I think that the XML API that NanoXML provides is quite usable.
In contrast to that,
using DOM would be not so funny. I also doubt that using some utility
classes to handle DOM is a
better solution than using NanoXML.
Therefore I still suggest to update NanoXML to the latest version. I will
report any problems
encountered on the list.
PS: A very elegant means to handle configuration data is data binding.
izpack-devel mailing list
izpack-devel at lists.berlios.de
More information about the izpack-devel