[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
-- Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> XOM will be no more and sometimes less verbose than JDOM. How does
> o:XML compare to this? Could you show us the equivalent o:XML code
> for the above JDOM code?
o:XML allows for inline literal elements, and since in your example the
data is constant you'd simply do <para id="p1" align="left"/>, but that's
probably not what you meant -
programmatically you could add an attribute like this:
<para align="left">
<o:eval select="Attribute('id', $id)"/>
</para>
etc. now the real advantage with o:XML (same with XSLT) is imo that
you can mix literal content, plainly laid out, with programmatically
generated nodes, and that you can navigate data directly with XPath. In
o:XML you can also encapsulate dynamic/static nodes in a Type together
with program logic.
regarding SAX it's by no means read-only - in fact the ObjectBox allows
for program results to be streamed to a SAX ContentHandler as it is
generated, thus fitting nicely into an XML handling chain.
/m
Martin Klang
Alpha Plus Technology Ltd
|
