[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> This is exactly the problem with the DOM which you rail against. One standard API for all languages regardless of whether staticlly or dynamically typed, weakly or strongly typed, garbage collected or not is bound to be insufficient many cases. Add the fact that this API will have to ignore programming idioms, design patterns and naming conventions in most of its target languages since it will just pick one means that using it will be counter-intuitive from using other APIs in these target languages.
This is an important point. I was a huge enthusiast of DOM at the beginning.
I thought they got it exactly right using IDL for language-agnostic
specification. But at that time my Zen of XML was pretty thin. As I've
understood more deeply how XML is more than yet another data format for
programmers to use, I've realized that the XML should inform the programming
idiom, not the other way around. Given that I use Python for XML processing,
and that Python is, regardless of any other value, a language rich in
programming idioms, I realized that there were many very rich ways to process
XML, and that DOM acted as something of a jail cell restricting me to one
approach.
--
Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc.
http://uche.ogbuji.net http://4Suite.org http://fourthought.com
Track chair, XML/Web Services One Boston: http://www.xmlconference.com/
Basic XML and RDF techniques for knowledge management, Part 7 -
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-think12.html
Keeping pace with James Clark - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/libra
ry/x-jclark.html
Python and XML development using 4Suite, Part 3: 4RDF -
http://www-105.ibm.com/developerworks/education.nsf/xml-onlinecourse-bytitle/8A
1EA5A2CF4621C386256BBB006F4CEC
|
