XOM API for Processing XML with Java

[Nils_Kilden-Pedersen AT Countrywide.Com]

xom-interest-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org wrote on 03/26/2004 06:24:59 AM:
> FYI, it's a medical term that means "in a coma", i.e. asleep and not 
> waking up. It's was my punnish attempt to indicate that the lists are 
> not live like JDOM's and DOM's, but not dead either. They're in 
> between. I suppose I could call them undead (or unlive perhaps?) but 
> does anyone have a better suggestion.

http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=comatose

(I like comatose, though)
>From Nils_Kilden-Pedersen AT Countrywide.Com  Fri Mar 26 12:26:12 2004
Return-Path: <Nils_Kilden-Pedersen AT Countrywide.Com>
Delivered-To: xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from plasmtp2.cwdir.com (plasmtp2.cwdir.com [12.41.194.130])
        by happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EBBF20087
        for <xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Fri, 26 Mar 2004 12:26:12 -0500 (EST)
Received: from 63.166.226.133 by plasmtp2.cwdir.com with ESMTP (SMTP
        ready (MMS v5.6.1)); Fri, 26 Mar 2004 11:25:59 -0600
X-Server-Uuid: 9091D931-1F46-4DE2-9795-CA7DDD1121E4
In-Reply-To: <p06010201bc89650fee34@[192.168.254.4]>
To: xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [XOM-interest] Preserving base URIs on detachment
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.0.3 September 26, 2003
Message-ID: 
<OFBB4636C7.EA01A4E3-ON88256E63.005F34F8-88256E63.005F7269 AT countrywide.com>
From: Nils_Kilden-Pedersen AT Countrywide.Com
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 09:22:32 -0800
X-Form: Reply
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Emerald/Servers/CWExternal(Release
        6.0.2CF2|July 18, 2003) at 03/26/2004 09:21:42 AM, Serialize complete
        at 03/26/2004 09:21:42 AM
X-WSS-ID: 6C7AB8100S81426174-06-01
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.4
X-BeenThere: xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
Precedence: list
List-Id: xom-interest.lists.ibiblio.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/xom-interest>,
        <mailto:xom-interest-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/xom-interest>
List-Post: <mailto:xom-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/xom-interest>,
        <mailto:xom-interest-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 17:26:13 -0000

xom-interest-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org wrote on 03/25/2004 08:47:11 PM:
> There are basically two approaches to this, and they are distinguished 
thusly:
> 
> Should an element created in memory (i.e. not parsed) retain the base 
> URI of its parent when detached?
> 
> For instance, suppose we parse a document at http://www.example.com/ 
> to build a Document object. All the elements in this document 
> initially have a base URL of http://www.exmaple.com/. Now we do this:
> 
> Document doc = builder.build("http://www.example.com/";);
> Element child = new Element("child");
> // child.getBaseURI() returns null
> doc.getRootElement().appendChild(child);
> // child.getBaseURI() returns http://www.example.com
> child.detach()
> 
> What should child.getBaseURI() return now? null or 
http://www.example.com?

I still believe that you should think of some way to make it explicit, 
because there are use cases for both scenarios.
If booleans are unacceptable, go with an enumeration, i.e. 
detach(Node.PRESERVE_BASE_URI), or something like that.

Nils