Re: Object with a toXML method

[James Perkins <jrperkinsjr@xxxxxxxxx>]

Walden,
That's a good point. I was mainly just trying to save some ease of
integration, but then again, I now have yet another library to add.

Thanks for the advice though, I always appreciate it.

James R. Perkins


On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 08:52, Walden H. Leverich
<WaldenL@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> Coming from .Net, not Java, but I would expect the same issues apply...
> the advantage of implementing your own XML serialization method is that
> you then have _complete_ control over the serialization process. You
> don't always need that (in fact it might be rare that you do) but if
> you're doing the serialization you can control which properties and
> fields get serialized and in what way they get serialized. IMHO, if you
> _need_ that control the program for it, else let a serialization
> framework do the heavy lifting.
>
> -Walden
>
> --
> Walden H Leverich III
> Tech Software
> (516) 627-3800 x3051
> WaldenL@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.TechSoftInc.com
>
> Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur.
> (Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.)
> --
> This is the Java Programming on and around the iSeries / AS400 (JAVA400-L)
> mailing list
> To post a message email: JAVA400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/java400-l
> or email: JAVA400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/java400-l.