[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Miles Sabin wrote:
> I'm afraid I don't find this example particularly compelling,
Not everyone will agree, but this is what I like about XOM: It is
underwhelming. Take another tiny example:
import nu.xom.*;
public class Tiny {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Element tiny = new Element("tiny");
Document doc = new Document(tiny);
System.out.println(doc.getStringForm());
}
}
What I mean is that in 3 lines (4 with import), XOM produces a well-formed
XML document. How many lines would it take to do that with a Java
implantation of SAX or DOM? Economy of keystrokes is important to me -- not
the only consideration, but important to me. I suspect other care about that
too. XOM passes the test of:
* simplicity
* readability
* typeability
in my book. I guess I like it for the same reasons I like RELAX NG's compact
syntax.
> because it invites a comparison with,
>
> public class Date
> {
> public static void main(String[] args)
> {
> System.out.print(
> "<?xml version="1.0"?>\n"+
> " <date type="ISO">\n"+
> " <year>2002</year>\n"+
> " <month>09</month>\n"+
> " <day>20</day>\n"+
> "</date>\n"
> );
> }
> }
>
Sure, but, in my little micro tutorial, which was not meant to be
compelling, all I am gave XOM was a few names; it handles well-formedness in
the serialization for me. I like that too.
I'm going to give XOM a fighting chance.
Mike
|
