OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] Adam Bosworth Article - what does "direct access" mean?

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>,"Sean McGrath" <sean.mcgrath@propylon.com>,<xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
  • Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Adam Bosworth Article - what does "direct access" mean?
  • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com>
  • Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 07:55:38 -0800
  • Thread-index: AcK9d2mEsfVwZMEsRRiDXGKL7au08wAADsT3
  • Thread-topic: [xml-dev] Adam Bosworth Article - what does "direct access" mean?

XML-DEVers sure like to go off the deep end when someone challenges their sacred cow. 

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:clbullar@ingr.com] 
	Sent: Thu 1/16/2003 7:52 AM 
	To: 'Sean McGrath'; xml-dev@lists.xml.org 
	Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Adam Bosworth Article - what does "direct access" mean?

	His example shows that using XML to support a single function
	is pretty awful.
	It is. Not new news.  As the guy who talked long about
	coarse transactions, he knows most folks don't do that.
	He knows that they do that repeatedly.  Painful code to
	enter and maintain, and brittle.  XML is not object-oriented.
	He is showing that using paths to identify data
	for use by a function is verbose.  
	It is.  Not new news. As the guy who talked long about
	loose coupling, he knows what the tradeoffs are in data
	driving with a syntax unification approach based on
	a hierarchical format.  Path identification should
	go away in the program but how else will we deal
	with selectors?  XML is not object-oriented.
	He's right that the code examples are real ugly.
	So the alternatives are?  
	Ok, we go back to the old Xerox approach to
	markup:  elements and text nodes.  Full stop.
	Straightforward binding and no intricacies
	from those messy attributes, PIs, DOCTYPEs,
	and so on. IDs?  Interoperability?  Oops.
	While we're at it, let's fix that semantic
	problem.  Let's bind data to code and send
	it all as one neat package.  Security?  OOPs.
	Good discussion topic.  XML is not object-oriented.
	Well... duh!
	From: Sean McGrath [mailto:sean.mcgrath@propylon.com]
	Article entitiled "Speaking XML" by Adam Bosworth:
	I'm intrigued by "it is becoming increasingly necessary for developers to
	directly access and
	manipulate XML documents."
	My reading of the article suggests that "direct access" here means "lets
	make the XML a direct
	serialization syntax for objects":
	         import Customer
	         Customer c = new Customer ("Customer.xml")
	If this is the line of thought I'm fairly squarely against it for more
	reasons than I have time
	to articulate at the moment. Just looking for opinions on my interpretation at
	this point!
	The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
	initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
	The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
	To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
	manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS