[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Enlightenment via avoiding the T-word
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: Tim Bray <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 13:46:47 -0500
Which is why I asked earlier about points of
view on these subjects depending on implementation
background. The namespace utility's usefulness
has a lot to do with the system in which it is
used. Again, surface syntax doesn't tell one
enough about the properties of the *system*.
That is why the groves people spent their
time working out a way to find and map invariants.
On mapping relational databases: declare all
of the fields as globals and find out how much
name grunge is in your legacy system. Declare
them locally (children in elements whose names
ARE the tablenames), and you hide all of that.
Use the ODBC connection of XML Spy to the
relational database and see how it represents
what it gets.
What you do about it depends on how much system code
you are willing to rewrite and that depends on
who else is using the schema. But gad, there is a
lot of grunge in almost any legacy table design
and you have to track a bunch of people down to
find out if it is real or just grunge.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Tim Bray [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Hmm, I'm not willing to go nearly as far as Rick. But he's done
a good job of pointing out that overloading names in a single
markup vocabulary does have a real cost, and one you should
worry about (and I found it instructive that in the RDBMS world,
ERWIN raises a flag on this).
On the other hand, when I'm writing O-O software, when I pick
variable and method names I don't worry very much about whether
they clash with locals elsewhere. Hold, on that's not true: if
you're building a class in Java, you'd better not have a toString()
method that launches missiles :)... but it's certainly a different
style of thinking.
There's scope for a nice general essay here about the
differences between ways of thinking about data; basic WF XML,
OOP, and RDBMS represent instructively different thought
patterns. PSVI and DTDs and SOAP and so on fit into this
pattern in interesting ways. -Tim