XOM API for Processing XML with Java

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

Wolfgang Hoschek wrote:

> Yes, to support 0.01% of use cases, we pay the prize of having an ugly 
> conceptual misfit, no matter how we juggle it.

Namespaces are an ugly conceptual misfit, no matter how you approach 
them. Possibly I could avoid the problems by going back to the beginning 
and working namespaces into the Element class, so it use Namespace 
objects instead of strings, and modeling namespaces in scope like XPath 
does rather than namespaces declared like XOM does. But the memory cost 
still worries me. Much worse is the question of how to handle namespaces 
in scope as elements are moved around, disconnected from their parents, 
and inserted into new documents. I thought about this a couple of years 
ago, and I didn't know how to handle it then and I don't know how to 
handle it now. I tend to doubt there is a good way to handle namespaces 
that will fit all use cases well. :-(

--
Elliotte Rusty Harold  elharo AT metalab.unc.edu
XML in a Nutshell 3rd Edition Just Published!
http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian3/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596007647/cafeaulaitA/ref=nosim