XOM API for Processing XML with Java

[Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo AT metalab.unc.edu>]

At 2:44 PM -0800 2/19/04, dirk bergstrom wrote:

> The people asking for Java serialization probably don't really care about
> the above argument.  They just want to use XOM as the XML package in an
> application that *requires* Java serialization (eg. EJB).
>
> It appears that saying "XOM won't be serializable" is equivalent to saying
> "XOM can't be used in EJB".  This is perhaps a reasonable thing to say,
> perhaps not, but it's almost entirely orthogonal to a discussion of which
> serialization method is "better".

That's been said. I've yet to be convinced that statement is true 
though. I don't know enough about EJB to judge whether "EJB requires 
object serialization" is actually a true statement for myself. To 
convince me, you're going to need a compelling use case, and an EJB 
expert who confirms that that use-case really does need XOM objects 
to be Serializable. For instance, you'll need to explain to me why 
you can't just call toXML and serialize the resulting string. Hell, 
you coudl even do this in your own subclass that implemented 
Serializable and provided readObject and writeObject methods (or 
would it have to implement Externalizable for complete control? I 
forget.) Either way, that seems like a simple fix for any system that 
simple doesn't work with serializing XOM objects.

If good reasons were provided, then I would begin to consider whether 
implementing Serializable was practical. It may not be. But so far, I 
remain unconvinced it's even useful.
--

  Elliotte Rusty Harold
  elharo AT metalab.unc.edu
  Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003)
  http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml
  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA