• To: Gustaf Liljegren <gustaf.liljegren@b...>,xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Syntax + object model
• From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 06:46:45 -0400
• In-reply-to: <3.0.6.32.20030523204507.0105a6c0@p...>
• References: <3.0.6.32.20030523204507.0105a6c0@p...>

At 8:45 PM +0200 5/23/03, Gustaf Liljegren wrote:

>Imagine XML like a standardized object model of various node types, with no
>rules whatsoever about the serialization format. Why would such a standard
>have less chance to survive?

Because standard object models don't cross language and platform 
boundaries particularly well. DOM's living proof of that. It's bad 
Java, bad C++, bad C#, bad Perl, and bad everything else. Better to 
have a standard syntax and different, non-standard, independent 
object models optimized for their particular domains and uses that 
all operate on the same underlying syntax. Object models are *local*. 
Syntax is *global*.
-- 

   Elliotte Rusty Harold
   elharo@m...
   Processing XML with Java (Addison-Wesley, 2002)
   http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xmljava
   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0201771861/cafeaulaitA

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Syntax + object model
    • From: "Linda Grimaldi" <grimlinda@e...>
  • Re: Syntax + object model
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Syntax + object model
    • From: Gustaf Liljegren <gustaf.liljegren@b...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Syntax + object model
• Next by Date: Re: Syntax + object model
• Previous by thread: Re: Syntax + object model
• Next by thread: Re: Syntax + object model
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread