Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Gavin Thomas Nicol" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: <email@example.com>
- Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 16:28:26 -0500
> Minimalism *does* have long-term advantages to the end user
> because the tools they use will tend to be less buggy, delivered on time,
There is probably some degree of truth to this, but I'm not sure
it would be orders of magnitude.
> More to the point, the higher-level abstractions and APIs built on
> top of SML will be easier to use because they don't have to hide
> as much underlying complexity as XML APIs do.
I really stronly disgree with this.
The DOM is a good example if a general-purpose/application independent
API. Very complex, with many special cases. In general though, an API,
by definition, is *application* specific. For a given application,
I cannot see why the API needs to reflect the underlying
implementation of the system. For example, I just implemented a
fairly complex security system that has calls like:
Principal authenticate(String id, String key);
and it has 3 different implementations: one using XML, one using ODBC,
and another using LDAP. From an *application* perspective, these
differences are irrelevant.
You know that I was, and still am, in favor of having an API
other than the DOM which would allow *simpler* optimization for
performance. That doesn't imply the requirement for something like
SML to me though....
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:email@example.com)