Slashdot Mirror
Apache Releases Xerces 2.0 XML Parser
GeneOff writes: "Xerces 2.0 is out! You can get it here. This XML parser features full XML Schema conformance and partial support for DOM Level 3. The XNI (Xerces Native Interface,) is very cool. Xerces is arguably the most widely deployed Java based XML parser. Open source projects like those from Apache do a very good job of tracking upcoming standards like XML Schema (no more weird DTDs.) Kind of like Linux 2.5 and the USB 2.0 spec."
It'd be nice if the story content mentioned that it's a new version of Xerces-J- ie: Java. Our product (shameless plug: Expressus Design Studio) is built around Xerces-C (C++) which seems to lag a bit behind Xerces-J in terms of features. I believe development on Xerces-C started AFTER Xerces-J so it makes sense.
I'd have to agree with a previous poster who mentioned the Apache folk's as being good at keeping up with emerging technology- they've also proven quite helpful on the -dev mailing list.
It'll be interesting to see if the XML Schema handling is close to or as fast as the DTD handling. I know that in our particular application (real-time automated classification) parsing the document takes almost as much time as what we have to do to "learn" where it belongs in a given data set.
Another thought, partially off-topic, pertains to a previous poster's comments about working from a DTD and then migrating to XML Schema. I have to wonder how much of that is simply habit; I know that I've certainly had to solve problems that DTD's just can't handle. In my mind, even though habit may dictate starting with a DTD, starting with something that clearly will not accomplish the task at hand seems inherently flawed.
I have a few questions:
1. Are XML developer's ever NOT programmers?
2. If so, would XML developers be willing to use XML Schema design tools. My own reaction (as a [mostly C++] programmer) is that I'll stick with emacs and do everything by hand, thank you very much. I get the impression that most programmer's shun code-generating type products. Of course, last I checked there was a holy-war over such ideas... I may have just shot myself in the foot by mentioning emacs. =)
3. Do programmer's view XML (and it's friends) as a programming language? I feel a bit ridiculous even asking such a question because I certainly don't view XML as anything similar to C, C++, Java, etc. But then, I have been surprised on more than one occasion in the past.
Anyway, I ramble... =) Congratulations to the Apache folks on doing a great job with all of their projects I've come across!