• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Penance for misspent attributes
• From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
• Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 04:18:53 +0000
• In-reply-to: <001201c1fd40$0f99da80$887ba8c0@mitchum>
• References: <bng8eukvs0o7n1c994ri3v3s7v13bapj4i@4...> <001201c1fd40$0f99da80$887ba8c0@mitchum>

Bill de hÓra <dehora@e...> wrote:
|> From: Arjun Ray [mailto:aray@n...] 

|> Hidden here is (IMHO) a deep critique of SAX as a useful API. 
| 
| I don't know. XML modellers faq:
| 
| Q: Why are you putting stuff in attributes? 
| A: I can't be arsed to code a buffer.
| 
| Seems more like gonzo laziness to me. 

Sounds like the Path of Least Resistance to me.  Not everybody is a
theoretician, with a grasp of what generally useful feature could be
missing.

For example, what if SAX offered a semantic value stack in parallel with
the open element stack it has to maintain internally?  If every app that
needs one has to reinvent it, quite a few apps might be "redesigned" not
to need one.

I think Simon was saying, inter alia, *that's* a dead end.

• References:
  • Re: Penance for misspent attributes
    • From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
  • RE: Penance for misspent attributes
    • From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@e...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Penance for misspent attributes
• Next by Date: Re: Objections to / uses of PSVI?
• Previous by thread: RE: Penance for misspent attributes
• Next by thread: Re: Penance for misspent attributes
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread