[jdom-interest] Element Reference from Attribute

James Strachan james at metastuff.com
Mon Nov 20 06:35:37 PST 2000

----- Original Message -----
From: "bob mcwhirter" <bob at werken.com>
> > Admittedly, you'd have to cast a little bit to use your new highly
> > XPathElement / XPathAttribute objects but that would be an acceptable
> > trade-off wouldn't it?
> The only problem I see there, is...
> My XPath engine doesn't build the Document.  It just accepts a Document
> from the client.  As long as it's a JDOM Document, I'm happy.

Maybe your XPath engine should accept a JDOM XPathDocument ;-)

> I'd rather not force folks to use a special builder for XPath-intended
> documents.

Its a slipery slope though. As more and more things are required of JDOM
from 'higher levels' to do XPath, XInclude, XSLT, RDF, XLink, ...., then
before you know it JDOM is as bloated as DOM.

> What if I need XPathElement, and Mr. Harold needs XIncludeElement,
> then we can't apply both XPath and XInclude to the same base
> document.

Agreed - though I think either we allow XPath / XInclude style navigation
semantics (Node interface, parent relationships) everywhere in JDOM or we
have 2 standard trees, "JDOM light" and "JDOM heavier". "JDOM heavier" would
support everything required for XPath, XSLT and XInclude. (So would be quite
DOM like from the functionality perspective).

> Ends up sounding like the JDOM->DOM conversion so you can apply
> XSLT with Xalan right now.  Conversions are bad (or at least are
> performance hindering).

I agree.


James Strachan
email: james at metastuff.com
web: http://www.metastuff.com

If you are not the addressee of this confidential e-mail and any
attachments, please delete it and inform the sender; unauthorised
redistribution or publication is prohibited. Views expressed are those of
the author and do not necessarily represent those of Citria Limited.

More information about the jdom-interest mailing list