[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: JSR-000093: JAXR - your opinions?
I think JAXR will complement the work being done in ebXML regrep. I believe the proper approach has been taken: have one group of people deal with open wire formats to ensure interoperability; then have other groups who have some interest in certain languages provide the bindings. We would run into problems if we had the same group try to tackle wire formats and language bindings, because a particular language/platform/etc would be inadvertently biased. I believe the DOM confused things by trying to provide a large number of bindings and ended up spec'ing to the least common denominator. For example, the Java bindings can't use method overloading because certain scripting languages don't support it (getAttribute, getAttributeNS, argh!) That opened the door to the JDOM people to make a proper binding to Java that Java developers would find useful. Alex -- Alex Ceponkus Technical Lead, Web Services Standards Bowstreet -----Original Message----- From: Bob Sutor [SMTP:email@example.com] Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 4:52 PM To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: JSR-000093: JAXR - your opinions? I would be interested in hearing the opinions of this group regarding the proposed JSR-000093 Java(TM) API for XML Registries 1.0 (JAXR) at http://java.sun.com/aboutJava/communityprocess/jsr/jsr_093_jaxr.html particularly because it includes as contributions ebXML Registry Information Model Specification and the ebXML Registry Services Specification. In particular, it raises again the issue of specific language bidings for XML-related specifications and who should do them (reminds me of the DOM), and how to deal with such bindings when the primary means of accessing an application is via XML messaging. Bob Sutor, IBM ebXML Vice-Chair
Powered by eList eXpress LLC