• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: syntax, model
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 21:09:07 -0400
• In-reply-to: <20031024001802.94458.qmail@w...>
• Organization: Red Bridge Interactive, Inc.
• References: <20031024001802.94458.qmail@w...>
• Reply-to: gtn@r...
• User-agent: KMail/1.5.3

On Thursday 23 October 2003 08:18 pm, Mike Champion wrote:
> I can't reconcile the idea that shared data models are
> "non-interoperable" or "pernicious" with the real,
> practical success of XSLT, DOM, CSS, etc. Likewise, I
> don't see much merit in the argument that the very
> real warts on these things have to do with their being
> defined on a reference data model rather than concrete
> syntax.

I'd actually say that the main reason these all achieve some degree of success 
is that they are a data model that mirrors the syntax, and are theyreby 
largely application independent. In most applications the data model of the 
application is actually distinct from the DOM, even though the DOM might be 
used to manipulate the data of the application. Subtle distinction, but an 
important one.

• References:
  • Re: syntax, model
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: RE: syntax, model
• Next by Date: Re: syntax, model
• Previous by thread: RE: syntax, model
• Next by thread: Re: syntax, model
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread