|
| Re: Moving from XMLBeans to JAXP or rather EMF ? [message #531794 is a reply to message #531773] |
Thu, 06 May 2010 08:32   |
 Jan Reimann
Messages: 140
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Philipp,
in my opinion JAXP is just XML processing, i.e. serializing and
deserializing, and finally persisting it as XML. EMF is more than this.
Primarily, EMF is modeling, as you already know! The advantage is that
you are not dependent of the serialization - as a side effect you can of
course serialize your models as XMI. But: you can define a textual
syntax for example, generate a graphical editor and a lot of other
stuff. Another fact is that you could easy integrate model refactoring
if you do the work EMF based. Check out this:
http://emftext.org/refactoring/
best regards,
Jan
Philipp W. Kutter wrote:
> Hi.
> I started in a new project at a large investment bank.
>
> The use up to now XML beans to create XML complying to FpML with a
> generated API and then serializing it.
>
> I of course suggested them to use EMF for this, as I do this for years.
>
> They plan to go for JAXP which they claim does the same, and is more
> "mainstream" as it is built into Java 6.
>
> Are there reasons to use JAXP instead of EMF for this?
>
> Does anyone know what features of EMF (besides the generated editors,
> and the reflective API) we are missing by using JAXP?
>
> Any input and suggestions are welcome.
>
> Regards,
> Philipp
|
|
|
| Re: Moving from XMLBeans to JAXP or rather EMF ? [message #531829 is a reply to message #531773] |
Thu, 06 May 2010 09:20 |
Ed Merks
Messages: 33137
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------010100020701000800080801
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Philipp,
Comments below.
Philipp W. Kutter wrote:
> Hi.
> I started in a new project at a large investment bank.
>
> The use up to now XML beans to create XML complying to FpML with a
> generated API and then serializing it.
So why aren't they happy with what they have already?
>
> I of course suggested them to use EMF for this, as I do this for years.
>
> They plan to go for JAXP which they claim does the same, and is more
> "mainstream" as it is built into Java 6.
Do you mean JAXB? JAXP is really just DOM and they could have used
that years ago...
>
> Are there reasons to use JAXP instead of EMF for this?
They might want to have a look at
Binding XML to Java
< http://www.theserverside.com/tt/articles/article.tss?l=Bindi ngXMLJava>
We concluded that in terms of the generated API, simple schemas produce
effectively the same APIs.
>
> Does anyone know what features of EMF (besides the generated editors,
> and the reflective API) we are missing by using JAXP?
I often encounter folks busy doing a JAXBotomy. They complain about
things like the fact that JAXB don't properly maintain containment the
way DOM and EMF do. So you can easily end up with a cyclic graph
instead of a tree. Building a UI around JAXB artifacts is challenging
because the instances don't notify. You won't be able to use things
like CDO, GMF/Graphiti. So basically you can generate an API just like
the EMF one, and then you'll spend the rest of your budget writing all
other things from scratch the plain old tedious way.
>
>
> Any input and suggestions are welcome.
>
> Regards,
> Philipp
--------------010100020701000800080801
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Philipp,<br>
<br>
Comments below.<br>
<br>
Philipp W. Kutter wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:hrtovn$r7g$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite">Hi.
<br>
I started in a new project at a large investment bank.
<br>
<br>
The use up to now XML beans to create XML complying to FpML with a
generated API and then serializing it.
<br>
</blockquote>
So why aren't they happy with what they have already?<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:hrtovn$r7g$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite"><br>
I of course suggested them to use EMF for this, as I do this for years.
<br>
<br>
They plan to go for JAXP which they claim does the same, and is more
"mainstream" as it is built into Java 6.
<br>
</blockquote>
Do you mean JAXB? JAXP is really just DOM and they could have used
that years ago...<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:hrtovn$r7g$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite"><br>
Are there reasons to use JAXP instead of EMF for this?
<br>
</blockquote>
They might want to have a look at <br>
<blockquote><a target="_out"
href=" http://www.theserverside.com/tt/articles/article.tss?l=Bindi ngXMLJava">Binding
XML to Java</a><br>
</blockquote>
We concluded that in terms of the generated API, simple schemas produce
effectively the same APIs.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:hrtovn$r7g$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite"><br>
Does anyone know what features of EMF (besides the generated editors,
and the reflective API) we are missing by using JAXP?</blockquote>
I often encounter folks busy doing a JAXBotomy. They complain about
things like the fact that JAXB don't properly maintain containment the
way DOM and EMF do. So you can easily end up with a cyclic graph
instead of a tree. Building a UI around JAXB artifacts is challenging
because the instances don't notify. You won't be able to use things
like CDO, GMF/Graphiti. So basically you can generate an API just like
the EMF one, and then you'll spend the rest of your budget writing all
other things from scratch the plain old tedious way.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:hrtovn$r7g$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite"><br>
<br>
Any input and suggestions are welcome.
<br>
<br>
Regards,
<br>
Philipp
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--------------010100020701000800080801--
Ed Merks
Professional Support: https://www.macromodeling.com/
|
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03968 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
0 / 0%
