W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-microxml@w3.org > October 2012

API compatability

From: David Lee <David.Lee@marklogic.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 15:53:24 -0700
To: "public-microxml (public-microxml@w3.org)" <public-microxml@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EB42045A1F00224E93B82E949EC6675E16B0EC8E64@EXCHG-BE.marklogic.com>
I suspect this is beyond the scope of the spec, but maybe worth considering.
Suppose I discover that a MicroXML "parser" fits my needs better than an XML "parser"
(maybe it is faster ? tbd)

What would it take, in theory, to take a MicroXML parser and plug it into a toolset expecting an XML parser ?
Concrete:
Say for example I wanted to use JAXB or say Saxon XSLT ... but use my own MicroXML parser ...
what would that mean ?

Off the cuff I think that means a transformation from the MicroXML data model to the XML Data Model.

Say I had a MicroXML "SAX-Like" parser and wanted to bridge it to a XML SAX parser ...

Is this reasonable and possible ?
I believe the loose goal of Data Model Compatibility would accommodate (but not guarantee) this.

Might it be worth an additional spec,  and pre-consideration, as to what it would take to map the MicroXML Data Model to the XDM ?   or equivalently (but more concretely) a particular MicroXML Parser to a XML Parser ?  that is, what would it take to wrap a Micro XML Parser API to an XML Parser API ...  I believe the intentions are that this would be trivial.  but does the spec require or facilitate it ?

-David





-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Lee
Lead Engineer
MarkLogic Corporation
dlee@marklogic.com
Phone: +1 812-482-5224
Cell:  +1 812-630-7622
www.marklogic.com<http://www.marklogic.com/>
Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2012 22:53:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 October 2012 22:53:54 GMT