• From: "Michael Sokolov" <sokolov@i...>
• To: <Tim.Bray@S...>, <rjelliffe@a...>
• Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:36:42 -0500

> From: Tim.Bray@S... [mailto:Tim.Bray@S...] > 
> Ever since Day 0, I've been uncomfortable with the notion 
> that there's anything O-O about XML.  

It makes me uncomfortable too, but it's sometimes the case that you need to
serialize your objects, and in such a case XML is a much better fit than
(say) tab-delimited text files.  The converse happens too - you sometimes
need to present your XML as an object, say to an application presentation
layer that has been built around the assumption that all data is objects.
The current XSLT Forms and XQuery application builders are trying to avoid
that, but I wonder if they will ever really supplant Java-based application
frameworks.

Where it really seems to go off the rails though is when people finding
themselves in these awkward situations decide they need a completely
universal top-to-bottom equivalence between XML Document and Object in an
attempt to magically make the impedance mismatch disappear.

-Mike

• References:
  • Re: An inquiry into the nature of XML and how it orients ourperception of information
    • From: Tim Bray <Tim.Bray@S...>