[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Title: RE: [xml-dev] Better design: "flatter is better" or "nesting is better" ?
Roger seems to be classifying application types. In so far as
XML can be applied to anything one has the horsepower to support
(XML is a Syntax. XML Doesn't Care.) one is tempted to say
this is not a fruitful line of classification because XML has
no semantics.
On the other hand, one will eventually have to choose or choose
to develop a set of adjacent languages with minimal overlap to
support the *types* of customers with *types* of information.
The rules of thumb for choosing here are much more interesting.
1. How to use the rendering and interactive clients. Flatter
is usually better because semantics limit scale and reach.
2. How to choose the message payloads
3. How to choose the archival/disk-resident files
Transience is of minimal importance. One wants to know things
like that, but it isn't the first consideration.
Though a worn metaphor, these choices determine the membership
of the ecology of applications, do impact the lifecycle of the
information, and determine one's bidding partners. These
choices are not purely technical.
len
From: Andrzej Jan Taramina [mailto:andrzej@chaeron.com]
Rick said:
> Engineering is based on quantifying aspects of particular jobs in
> order to be able replcate success, not lumping things together.
> It is some kind of logical fallacy to apply the 80/20 rule to
> collections of disparate objects.
Hmmm...let me paraphrase that:
"It depends..."
| 