Lists Home |
Date Index |
firstname.lastname@example.org (Bill de hÓra) writes:
>Simon St.Laurent wrote:
>> We've talked for years about the value of separating content from
>> presentation in XML. On the data side, that seem to map easily to
>> separating information from processing.
>Data from processing; sure.
>I've just remembered Bill Joy had a similar beef with HTML/XML a
>good while back. In an interview he once said the problem with
>sending markup was it had no behaviour - for that you need programs.
>It may have been in the context of Jini/JXTA.
It makes lots of sense that OOP folks would have difficulty with this,
given that OOP has made a virtue of binding data and behavior. (OOP's
XML integration problems strike me as eerily familiar to its RDBMS
integration problems, where a similar separation is popular.)
Trying to explain that mixing data and processing is fine while you're
processing the data and awful when you're transferring the information
between dissimilar systems doesn't always seem to go over well.
Programmers seem to put a lot of effort into abolishing "dissimilar"
instead of taking advantage of the separation. At least that's the
lesson I've seen in most of this Web Services stuff...
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org