We should check out whether it is used /at all/ by the rest of the
Wicket API. If not, let's loose the dependency.
Eelco
Gili wrote:
My 2 cents: keep it simple. If anyone requests more flexibility,
build it in later. The great benefit of dom4j is the simplicity and
ease of use of the API.
Gili
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
From the userlist:
BTW, I was wondering about the dom4j dependancy. The
only place its used is in
wicket.util.string.Strings.toString() as follows:
else if (object instanceof Node)
{
return ((Node)object).getText();
}
Is this just an artifact? I'm trying to keep my
application size to a minimum so I end up just
commenting it out so I can exclude the dom4j.jar. Any
chance you might get rid of it or is there some future
plans for it?
If this is actually the only place where we use dom4j, should we get
rid of it? We could favor the JAXP xml parxsers, but I don't know if
that is a good idea (opening up for /any/ xml parser).
Martijn
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
Wicket-develop mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
Wicket-develop mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
