Allan Lykke Christensen

Hi,
It depends on what it is that you want the diagram to tell you. Collaboration and Sequence Diagrams are showing the same information but in two different ways. Collaboration diagrams are good for understanding how the objects interactive with each other, hence Collaboration diagram. Sequence diagrams are good for understanding the flow of operations, hence Sequence diagram.
With most UML tools (Rational at least) you can generate Collaboration diagrams based on Sequence diagrams. I use this feature sometimes to get a better understanding of the connection between the diagrams.
Remember that you should only do diagrams if you think they will help! No point in doing stuff you don't need (except if your clients requires it!)
Kind regards,
Allan

I think that is an interesting observation about the point'n'click and short-cut problem. I have noticed this myself - it is somewhat easier to use a 'real' application when doing a lot of data entry compare to a web application?! Wonder if it is just a phychological issue.
In regards to the installation problem we can only thank Sun for their work and effort in the Java Web Start area.

here is my 2 cents:
I started using DIVs sometime back because I wanted to clearer code and wanted to avoid the tables inside tables inside tables inside tables. I worked great for many things I did but there was one particular thing that bugged me (where I had to resort going back to tables). The situation was this:
- I wanted to creating a simple two column layout (using a DIV for each column)
- The left column contained a menu.
- The right column contained the content of the page.
- The left column had a fixed colour (say yellow) and the right column was plain white.
The problem occured when the right column contained more content that what could fit into the browser window. For some strange reason the left column didn't continue all the way down but only to what could fit into the browser window.
Anyways - those are things I'm sure can be dealt with if you are a CSS shark - but until things like these become a bit more standard I will stick to using tables.
Allan

Hi Eric,
Don't get me wrong - I like Web applications myself, I just don't think it is the solution for everything.
In regards to offsite workers, I agree that that is not a problem in most places in Europe or America - but else in the world you don't have such priviledges as free dial-up (even dial-up can be a problem). For me this is a big problem because I travel a lot and spend a lot of time in airplanes (not easy getting Internet access there - even though the airlines have started implementing it).
Well, CSS is well supported from browsers 5.0 and up - but if you go below that you will see that nothing is working properly. Also the various browsers interprests the CSS differently. Just look at something like the box model.
I would like to see a web application with sophisticated user interaction such as Tree-views, progress-bars, rich-text edits, trackbar control, calendars, and tabs. I know it can be done - but consider the amount of dHTML code you have to write to make it compatible with the browsers out there.
Other than that I agree with you:
- CSS and XHTML greatly improves the compatibiltiy of web applications.
- Offside workers don't have a problem when they are given the right resources.
Kind regards,
Allan

Yes, I agree with Lasse, just that I would limit it even more to say that Web-based technology is any technology that uses the World-wide-web (i.e. html, etc. running through a web-browser).
Kind regards,
Allan

Hi all,
I run a small software development company doing any kind of software (web-based, and window-based).
I would like to start a debate about what you think is most suitable for business applications.
It seems that web-based applications became a real hit about 3 years by aspiring programmers who felt that normal window-based programming was difficult to get started with and therefore turned to the 'easy' web-based application.
What disturbs me a bit is that it seems that almost any new business application is created as a web-based application.
The upsides:
- Allows the application to be easily used on many platforms
- Allows the application to be used by many people at the same time
- Allows the application to be accessed at geographical separate locations
The downsides:
- Web applications does not support sophisticated user interaction
- Web applications are stateless (making it complicated to maintain the state in the application).
- Browser-hell (The developers end up spending much more time trying to get it to look and work properly in the many browsers and browser-versions.)
- Off-line users without Internet connection can't get access to the system (which can cause a lot of problems for off-side users who need to make changes in the system and replicate them when they get back to the office).
Anyways - there is plenty of more up- and downsides - but I would like to know what you thing about the subject?
Hope to hear from you soon!
Kind regards,
Allan

Thank you so much Lasse! That really helped.
saxParser.parse( new ByteArrayInputStream(buff), (DefaultHandler)handler );
Did it for me!

Hi all,
I've been browsing through the forum but have not been able to find a solution to this problem.
I have a whole directory full of JAR files. Each JAR file has an XML file inside which I need to parse one by one (the JAR files are not in the ClassPath)
So far I've created my SAX Parse (which is working fine) and I've created a JAR tool that will extract the XML file from a JAR and store it as a byte[] in memory. Now how do I connect my byte[] with the SAXParser?
To parse one file that is not in a JAR I simply do this:
saxParser.parse( new File("myfile.xml"), (DefaultHandler)handler );
Which is working great. But since I don't have my XML file as a File object but only as a byte[] I am a bit stuck.
I would like to avoid having to extract the XML file to the harddisk and load it from there.
Really hope that someone can help as I've been spending the last eight hours trying to solve this with no luck.
Kind regards,
Allan
[ March 28, 2004: Message edited by: Allan Lykke Christensen ]