[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Le vendredi 30 juin 2006 à 12:33 -0400, Richard Salz a écrit :
> > The only thing xsd is good for is showing how not to do it.
>
> In the Web Services (and database?) world, the XSD type system is used for
> databinding and therefore is hidden in the tooling, as Mike said.
> Databinding is used as a 'fast onramp' for code generators or other
> wizards to churn out new applications, gateway to legacy, etc. This is
> being done at various enterprises (from the very large to the SME), and
> it's not surprising to me that the vendors see those markets as more
> important than the 'xml programming model' market, if such a thing can
> even be cleanly defined and estimated.
I am personally still unconvinced that this is the right way to go and
still convinced that other more efficient ways of "binding" XML and
Object can be found either through "untyped bindings" like TreeBind, UML
modelling that generates both code and schemas from a single model or
code annotation.
(That was one of James Clark messages at XML 2001 and I think his talk
was really visionary.)
> RelaxNG can't address this since it has no native type system, but imports
> XSD's.
Can you elaborate why the fact that RELAX NG uses W3C XML Schema Part 2
as its more popular datatype library is a problem for data binding?
Eric
--
GPG-PGP: 2A528005
Freelance consulting and training.
http://dyomedea.com/english/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
(ISO) RELAX NG ISBN:0-596-00421-4 http://oreilly.com/catalog/relax
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ceci est une partie de message=?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
|
