Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:elharo@m...] <snip/> > And witness all the people using these products NOT. I > classify this stuff along with tree-based XML editors and > binary variants of XML as something that gets reinvented > several times a month without any actual market demand. I don't think I'd agree that there is no market demand for data-binding tools. I think the complexity of XML Schema -- and the consequent complexity of tools that rely upon it -- is inhibiting more widespread adoption. > On the other hand, over the last three years as I've taught > developers about DTDs, almost invariably the first question > is "How do I say that an element contains an int?" and the > second question is usually ""How do I say that an element > contains a year since 1969?" or some variant thereof. In other words, people want data-binding, but they want it to be simple. And it's really not clear to me why a language intended to just support XML validation needs to layer such concepts as types and inheritance on top of XML -- unless it is really intended to support data-binding.
|
