Re: PROPOSAL (round 3): Extensions to MDR XMI API

On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 10:20:35PM +0200, Martin Matula wrote:

> The disadvantage of that is that you will lose ability to use the
> extended features like reference resolver or reference provider with
> standard interfaces.

I think, that our discussions show, that the JMI standard in respect
to XMI handling is not very mature. We probably can expect major
changes in the next version of the standard based on extensions
implemented by different vendors including the MDR team.

Hence I think it is not too important to have one interface/class
which as well is standard compliant as well fits to users needs as
expressed on this list. Looking at our discussions I would recommend
instead:

* to provide a nice and clean standard implementation which gives
  exactly what the standard requires and nothing more (already exists)
* to start with an experimental and extended API in a separate Java package
  which incorporates new and experimental features; users of this new API
  will be warned that heavy changes may be expected during the next months
  and that it will stabilize not earlier than with the emergence of a new
  version of the JMI standard including more advanced XMI features

Concerning the content of the new API and implementation I do not want
to distract Martin any further from the work he is planning to
do. Hence I only restate what seems important to me and what I would
be happy to see in the final version provided by Martin and his
colleagues:

* writing to ContentHandler instead to OutputStream
* reading as ContentHandler instead from InputStream

-- 
Holger Krug
[email protected]