(dbxml) Generator vs Source

[Rogier Peters <Ro...@hippo.nl>]

Hi,

As I understood the xmldb-generator is to be deprecated in favor of the xmldb-source. I extended the xmldb-generator to be able to pass a depth parameter, as happens in the directory-generator. Although this worked reasonably well, we had a lot of performance issues and therefore are currently testing another xml database (X-Hive) and this leaves me with the following questions:

- What are the differences between a generator and a source, other than the different structural locations and different ways of calling them in the pipeline

- What are the reasons behind deprecating xmldb-generator?

- Should I write a source or a generator for X-Hive? (or, has anyone looked into this already)

With kind regards,

Rogier Peters

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org

RE: (dbxml) Generator vs Source

[Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gianugo Rabellino [mailto:gianugo@apache.org]
> Sent: donderdag 18 april 2002 17:10
> To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
> Subject: Re: (dbxml) Generator vs Source
>
>
> Rogier Peters [Rogier@hippo.nl] wrote:
>
> > - What are the differences between a generator and a
> source, other than the different structural locations and
> different ways of calling them in the pipeline
>
> Basically a source is a URL and can be used wherever a URL
> can be used,
> as a quick example with the XML:DB source you can store your XSL in
> an XML:DB database. Another place that comes to my mind is XInclude.
> Whereas a generator can be used only as a generator, i.e. in a fixed
> place of the sitemap.
>
> > - What are the reasons behind deprecating xmldb-generator?
>
> There was no reason for it anymore, given that FileGenerator
> was able to
> handle the XML:DB pseudo protocol directly. A Source is much more
> flexible and there was no loss of functionality.
>
> > - Should I write a source or a generator for X-Hive? (or,
> has anyone looked into this already)

Not that I know off, but it seems like this would be a nice little
sideproject for the X-Hive people themself... Since they are a supporter
of the XML:DB initiative, I assume they have some interest in supporting
OSS projects.

</Steven>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org

Re: (dbxml) Generator vs Source

[Gianugo Rabellino <gi...@apache.org>]

Rogier Peters wrote:

> - What are the differences between a generator and a source, other than the different structural locations and different ways of calling them in the pipeline

Basically a source is a URL and can be used wherever a URL can be used, 
as a quick example with the XML:DB source you can store your XSL in
an XML:DB database. Another place that comes to my mind is XInclude. 
Whereas a generator can be used only as a generator, i.e. in a fixed 
place of the sitemap.

> - What are the reasons behind deprecating xmldb-generator?

There was no reason for it anymore, given that FileGenerator was able to 
handle the XML:DB pseudo protocol directly. A Source is much more 
flexible and there was no loss of functionality.

> - Should I write a source or a generator for X-Hive? (or, has anyone looked into this already)

I'd definitely go for the Source. And I'd be personally interested to 
have a look at it :-)

Ciao,

-- 
Gianugo


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org