Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> John Sez ... > Right. But unless you are usiung a complete XML stack (XQuery/XSLT and > XML database), eventually you have to bind your XML to some third- > generation > language, and that's where full XML is a big pain. The Really Simple Data > Model is really easy to work with. > Interesting I didn't consider Data Binding. If one big use case is Data Binding I think MicroXML needs improvement. It lacks the basic "duck typing" that JSON has. A self-describing data binding markup needs (IMHO) to atleast identify common atomic values like String , Integer, Double, Date [JSON lacks this] , Boolean , Null [? not so useful but JSON has it]. If its going to take XSD to add this to MicroXML I think well be in trouble. And remember we need these not only for leaf elements but attributes and mixed text. Alternatively .... Everything is String , Element (Map + List of Element or String) , Map of String/String pairs. Secondly, unlike JSON, Maps (attributes) are limited to String values. So .. if I read this right, if simple Data Binding is an important use case we need a lot more work to do to both add typing - even duck typing like JSON, AND maybe simplify things more like getting rid of attributes entirely except possibly for typing, and figuring out a way for Element content to represent either/or (but not both at once) arrays and maps. ---------------------------------------- David A. Lee dlee@c... http://www.xmlsh.org
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
