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] What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: [xml-dev] Article on

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

On Saturday 19 February 2005 19:12, Elliotte Harold wrote:
> What they would get from an LCD interface is a way to
> write the code that converts into their internal
> representations that is independent of the specific model
> used. Currently, something like BEA's XQuery engine has
> to accept XOM, SAX, DOM, etc. They have to write a custom
> converter for each of these. If there were an LCD
> interface that were rich enough to populate their
> internal data model, but no richer, then they would only
> have to write that conversion logic once. Furthermore,
> they could easily support object models they didn't even
> know about, as long as those models provided an adapter
> to the LCD interface.

We clearly have very different objectives here. I think 
maybe at the core is that a LCD model is always going to 
compromise performance. I am tied of working with models 
that do this because they make my job harder. 

I can see why something simpler is appealing but think they 
are often short sighted in a way. When one of the 
limitations becomes a problem, off we go and create yet 
another model with just slightly different properties.

I was hoping there might be a way out of that circle. Maybe 
I should go off and think about how I would tackle this a 
bit more coherently. Thanks for enlightening me about why 
things go this way.



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

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