• To: 'Mike Champion' <mc@x...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 15:38:42 -0500

There's nothing wrong with putting training 
wheels on a bicycle until toddlers learn to 
keep their balance from a starting position.

Make no apologies for the DOM.  Before it, 
what did we have except the ESIS?  But 
yes, every five years, refactor.

len

From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@x...]

Well, yeah, but IMHO  XOM gets its simplicity largely by
avoiding the nasty bits of XML that the DOM flounders through
and gets itself dirty in the process.  I'm thinking specifically
of non-namespaced well-formed XML, "syntax sugar" such as CDATA 
sections, all the stuff that DTDs inflict on the data model 
such as entity declarations, entity references, default attribute 
values, and probably other horrors that I've managed to blissfully
forget.

Now I for one would be very very happy to see all this stuff
deprecated, or moved to some "XML syntax sugar preprocessor" 
spec, and then we could all build from a nice, clean, 
XPath-compatible data model.
If XOM can somehow promote that agenda, I'm all for it!  

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Next by Date: Re: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Previous by thread: Re: OT: Hundred Flowers (WAS: RE: Underwhelmed (WAS:
• Next by thread: Re: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread