[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:37:37 +0000, Christian Nentwich
<christian@systemwire.com> wrote:
> Roger,
>
> let's see:
> - The first approach does not scale - it will get too complex when
> you then want to reuse your invoice to build a yet larger model. Too
> much indirection to resolve.
> - The second approach does not impress me at all. It is weakly
> typed, not schema validatable, and the tags are not
> self-descriptive. Heaven help the support guy who has to pull that
> document.
I think my other replies make it clear that you'd want at least a type
attribute. Note, however, if you're building a large complex system
the issue isn't documents, it's data transport between layers. Eg,
for the support person dealing with building a metadata driven GUI the
second instance is a whole lot easier to deal with than having to code
for 1000's of individual element names...
<snip/>
--
Peter Hunsberger
|
