RE: JAXP and Java XML APIs (was RE: [xml-dev] difference bet. xer cesand crimson)

["Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leigh Dodds [mailto:ldodds@ingenta.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 12:45 PM
> To: Dylan Walsh; Xml-Dev
> Subject: JAXP and Java XML APIs (was RE: [xml-dev] difference bet.
> xerces and crimson)
> 
> I can only attribute this '3 months saving' to the difficulty 
> in the DOM
> model. From my own experiences the amount of code I have to write
> could have been greatly reduced by a means to query a DOM using
> XPath; something which seems to be on the way.

I'd be very interested in hearing a more detailed explanation of the
"difficulty in the DOM model".  (I'm hopelessly biased, having spent the
last four years on the DOM WG -- but trying to be open minded!).

I'd *guess* that the parts of the DOM model that people find difficult
include:

- Text nodes (a nice hack for mixed content, just another hassle everywhere
else)

- CDATA sections (the InfoSet, perhaps wisely, treats them as syntax sugar)

- The fact that entity reference nodes are exposed in the tree rather than
being hidden (again, the InfoSet probably did it right ... but the DOM WG
couldn't figure out a clean way to both hide entity references from
"browsers" and expose them to "editors").

- The long delay in support for the various stuff in DTDs, such as attribute
types, notation declarations, etc.)

- The long delay in support for a query mechanism other than
GetElementsByTagName()

- All the stuff in Java that's not in generic CORBA IDL. (There's not a
whole lot the DOM WG could do about this, is there?  Maybe the Java bindings
could have exploited Java-isms more???)

But these are just my own prejudices, and I'd love to hear about other
perspectives on what "gotchas" the DOM throws at them.

-