• To: Mike Champion <mc@x...>,xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
• From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
• Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 12:58:31 -0400
• In-reply-to: <JDKJKHK75CICHGVR1ZYS4Z1T0482UQ.3db5804b@MChamp>
• References: <3DB5761B.1050607@p...>

At 12:43 PM 10/22/2002 -0400, Mike Champion wrote:
>There seems to be a presupposition that OO approaches to XML app
>design are de rigeur .... but the whole point of XML is to break the
>encapsulation of data!  Am I missing something here?

XML does not have most of the properties of objects - it has no 
encapsulation and no methods, and the methods that it doesn't have aren't 
polymorphic. I haven't been happy with the approaches that try to make XML 
object oriented, it seems like a model mismatch.

Jonathan

• References:
  • Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! LongLive the Browser Wars!)
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML as "passive data"
• Next by Date: Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
• Previous by thread: Re: XML as "passive data"
• Next by thread: Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread