XOM API for Processing XML with Java

[Wolfgang Hoschek <whoschek AT lbl.gov>]

Also, perhaps one of the more useful implementations for RELAX and 
Schematron is MSV with JAXP masquerading:

http://www.ibiblio.org/osprey/trove/validator/JAXPmasquerading.html

Copied from the above page:

If your application is using SAX, it must have some code to  create a 
new instance of SAXParserFactory:
// create a new parser
 SAXParserFactory factory = SAXParserFactory.newInstance();

factory.setNamespaceAware(true);

SAXParser parser = factory.newSAXParser();

// parse the document
parser.parse(new File("abc.xml"),myHandler);


 To use JAXP masquerading, change the above code as shown in the 
following example:
// create a new parser
 SAXParserFactory factory =
  com.sun.msv.verifier.jaxp.SAXParserFactoryImpl();

factory.setNamespaceAware(true);

SAXParser parser = factory.newSAXParser();
 factory.setProperty("http://www.sun.com/xml/msv/schema";,
     schemaUrl);

// parse the document
parser.parse(new File("abc.xml"),myHandler);

On Sep 7, 2004, at 4:42 PM, Wolfgang Hoschek wrote:

> On Sep 7, 2004, at 3:56 PM, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
>
> > I'm not convinced this is on the right side of 80/20. Nor am I 
> > convinced this is the right API. (Is validation always done via a 
> > Builder? What about RELAX and Schematron?) If you can convince me of 
> > both of these points, I might consider it post 1.0, but I might also 
> > leave it as a third party opportunity.
>
> I'm not convinced either that this is the right API, but do I think 
> that in-memory validation is important and tricky/confusing enought to 
> warrant some built-in help by XOM. How would suggest it should be 
> done? My app would appreciate catching it's own bugs as early as 
> possible, and validating before sending docs onto the network would 
> help here.
>
> BTW, I've heard (from far away) that, RELAX and Schematron, etc. can 
> be done with SAX via some SAX Bridge, see
>
> http://www.relaxng.org/
> http://www.kohsuke.org/
>
> Hence it might be a good idea to let the user pass a Builder on input, 
> so the user can configure it as needed by whatever schema languages is 
> in use, and XOM does not need to care.