Subject: RE: [xsl] DOM v/s JDOM From: "Greg McCreath" <Greg.McCreath@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 15:36:49 +0200 |
Dennis, We have just started using JDOM for some of our XML processing. We mainly use Xerces/Xalan though. JDOM is much simpler to use and more java-like. That is true. We have no complaints about the speed. We use JDOM for the following reasons: 1) You can use your own subclassed nodes in a JDOM tree. This make it especially good for use in an MVC situation where the model is a tree structure and you want to use XPATH on it. 2) The XPATH usage is clean and simple. 3) It interoperates with SAX, Xerces, etc. As yet, I'm not too sure of it's XSL capabilities, I haven't been there yet. Greg. -----Original Message----- From: Dennis [mailto:maillistboxes@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: 15 May 2003 09:49 To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: 'xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' Subject: [xsl] DOM v/s JDOM Hi All, I have read @ many places that JDOM is a replacement of DOM and is much better in terms of performance (parsing) and usage. In our product we need to transform XML using XSL. Is the JDOM a right choice so on what merits do we decide to go for JDOM instead of DOM??? Is there any analysis done by someone??? Can we convert JDOM to DOM and vice versa? Can JDOM work with XSLTC i.e. translets?? We gonna use XALAN in our production environment. -Dennis __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] DOM v/s JDOM, Michael Kay | Thread | [xsl] DOM v/s JDOM, Joseph Kesselman |
Re: RE: [xsl] XPath to match XML fr, Tim Heighes | Date | RE: [xsl] XSLT In the Build Process, Passin, Tom |
Month |