Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Paul Prescod <email@example.com>
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 12:32:39 -0500
> I hope I'm not mis-representing Paul here, but as I've always read him (and
> agreed), his point is that XML, and the various ancillary technologies such as
> DOM and XML Schema, are more appropriate for content-exchange than for core
> business-object modeling.
> I don't think it makes sense to build a business-object model on top of DOM,
> but I do think it makes sense to define an exchange protocol that selializes
> objects to XML representations using DOM as a programmatic interface.
I agree. I'll point out, however, that it is REALLY EASY to generate XML
directly. In your opinion does the DOM actually make it easier?
If you use a "reverse SAX" interface (instead of a DOM-building interface)
then you could pipe together data consumers and if any of them ever needed
a DOM, it could build it.
> I think it also makes sense to use the DOM to develop a user-interface layer
> for such objects, possibly using the same WDDX or XML-RPC mappings in
> association with a set of style-sheets (although this is just one of many
> possible mechanisms).
Yes, it makes sense to use XML as an "interchange language" between your
business objects and your user interface. On the other hand, if that
interface is meant to be editable the information loss associated with
"dumbing down" to XML may not be acceptable.
Paul Prescod - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for only himself
"Remember, Ginger Rogers did everything that Fred Astaire did,
but she did it backwards and in high heels."
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)