Re: developing for something that isn't there..

[Top posting corrected]
Elhanan wrote:
Daniel Pitts wrote:
Elhanan wrote:
hi..

i've been taksed to create a framework that would read a complex xml
(do NOT say data-binding) and use the data to populate a java bean
tree..

problem that java bean tree has not been built yet.

i do have a concept of what to pull from the xml, what elements to read
in what order, what data to get from it. so i was thinking to create a
class that does so, but for every element (or chunk of data) pulled use
and interface to send messages about them (sorta like sax) the classes
which willl implement said interface, will get this data and build the
tree..

i was thinking that the messages will not contain an xml element itself
but rather 'convertes' as arguments.
the converted will implement an interface, that for now will simply
return another xml more formated. (just to see if my parsing works) but
will be replaced with another implmentation that will create an actuall
class.

i don't know exactly how tdd this as i don't even know the interfaces
of tree i just know my side, i don't even know if i'm on the right
path..

Sounds like the requirements aren't complete. If you have to parse an
XML document and produce tree, do the simple thing and create a DOM
tree. Since you're requirements aren't more specific, there isn't
anything you can do.

However, I would instead insist that your task is BLOCKED by the lack
of interfaces. And that any thing you do before hand would be a waste
of time and money.

Good luck,
Daniel.
the requirmentes are more or less complete, but we are doing things
'xp' the tree itself is complext and althought the interfaces are sort
of there, the guy warned that they may change, (may be even
considrebly) so i didn't want to risk taking them out of CVS.

parsing will be done using xom, this i allready know.


Please don't top post

Well, the the XP approach would be that you are all pair programming on
the same aspect, rather than all working on seperate aspects. If the
implementors can't give you a fixed interface, then you should do your
best with what the current interface is, and change it as needed. Its
okay if your code breaks because of their change, just be prepared to
update.

I have to say, from the window you've provided, I'm glad I don't work
at your shop. Sounds like a buzz-word-abuse orgy over there. "Lets
use JavaBeans, XML and Extreme Programming!" "Okay, what are we
making?" "Uh, User Stories?" "..."

<http://www.thedailywtf.com/>
Find a non-WTF job. :-)

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: developing for something that isnt there..
    ... xml was chosen becouse well. ... creating a tree model of javabeans was my insisting becouse i didnt' ... had a complelty differnt strucutre and style of interface, ... and interface to send messages about them the classes ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Re: developing for something that isnt there..
    ... problem that java bean tree has not been built yet. ... i do have a concept of what to pull from the xml, ... and interface to send messages about them the classes ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Re: TXMLDocument and TTreeView
    ... contents of an XML file. ... I can parse the TXMLDocument and add nodes to the tree with no ... I guess this is something to do with the fact that IXMLNode is an ... interface and I don't really understand how it works. ...
    (alt.comp.lang.borland-delphi)
  • developing for something that isnt there..
    ... problem that java bean tree has not been built yet. ... i do have a concept of what to pull from the xml, ... and interface to send messages about them the classes ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Re: Modeling Data for XML instead of SQL-DBMS
    ... It is a tree, ... A set of XML documents may include ... DBMS tools where the link specifications are metadata. ... but I don't think that is the hierarchy you ...
    (comp.databases.theory)