> 1. One of the goals of JAXB (as defined in the spec) is to circumvent
> SAX/DOM by allowing applications to access XML data directly via Java
> objects. But the new Java APIs generated by xjc still have to be
> incorporated into your application. I'm not sure if the effort is going
> to be less than using SAX/DOM's API since most people are familiar with
> the standard.
Yes, you should pick the right tool and it depends on a lot of factors.
SAX or DOM has its merit. JAXB is meant to offer more choices to the
developers and we never tried to dominate the XML API.
> 2. Customization could be a very useful feature of JAXB. But why the binding
> declarations have to be defined within an XML schema itself?
This is merely a limitation of the beta release and JAXB does provide a
way to write customizations externally.
> 3. Apparently JAXB still uses SAX/DOM underneath when
> marshalling/unmarshalling an XML doc. Conceptually, you should be able
> to do the marshalling/unmarshalling without building the DOM tree, at
Indeed JAXB RI does *NOT* use DOM as its underlying structure.
> 4. Has anyone done any comparison studies on JAXB with other similar products? Castor, JBind, etc..
I think there were a couple of articles in
http://www.xml.com/ and some
in IBM's developerWorks.
regards,
--
Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI 408-276-7063 (x17063)
Sun Microsystems kohsuke.kawaguchi_at_sun.com