Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Uche Ogbuji <uche@o...> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 8:34 AM, David Sheets <kosmo.zb@g...> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Uche Ogbuji <uche@o...> wrote: >> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 8:02 AM, David Sheets <kosmo.zb@g...> >> > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Uche Ogbuji <uche@o...> >> I need to transmit a binary blob. Should I use null-terminated strings? > > > So why are you using XML again? This is a general question: are null-terminated strings the right representation for transmitting binary blobs? Why not? Is it because null-terminated strings treat elements of the byte-stream domain as control characters? If I decided to use null-terminated strings to transmit a binary blob, would it be a "C WTF"? >> >> >> Could you please explain how this is a problem with overly strict data >> >> typing being more important than interpreting text in XML? I don't >> >> understand. >> > >> > >> > http://adtmag.com/articles/2002/12/01/xml-class-warfare.aspx >> > >> > >> > http://adtmag.com/articles/2003/01/31/the-worry-about-program-wizards.aspx >> > >> > And overall, since I'm wearying of this week's revival of perma-threads >> > from >> > 2000-2003, I'll finish with my own version of serenity, which is the >> > opposite of Timothy Cook's >> > >> > http://adtmag.com/articles/2002/09/30/serenity-through-markup.aspx >> >> I read these articles and they don't seem to address why overly strict >> data typing is the cause of this particular problem. >> >> Is it because the recipient is ignoring the data type of "string" and >> instead deciding to treat certain strings as special values? > > > I believe I made the connection in the above, re-quoted below: Sorry, I'm still not understanding how this description involving a stack of questionable technologies relates to the problem of typed XML transmission vs text XML transmission. Does XSD have a type for "string or null" that uses the string "null" to represent the null value? >> I'm not sure what you mean by "a problem with XML." The problem is >> manifold, >> and starts with the XSD data typing system and the way the PSVI >> subordinates >> data typing to the original text. It compounds as SOAP/WSDL builds on top >> of >> PSVI to wire in assumptions of text interpretations in code. The true >> fault >> is with the developer who coded the tool with a careless fencepost that >> actually circumvented the datatyping system altogether, but that's the >> entire point of this "Lessons learned" thread: when you make things so >> complex that few developers can understand and get them right (and I do >> mean >> few; I have experience to back that up) then you can hardly always look to >> shift blame on the developer when they get it wrong. Oh, I see. The developer circumvented the type system because it was too complex? And then the developer wrote software with a type error? And so the developer's tools were at fault? Is that what you're saying? David Sheets > > -- > Uche Ogbuji http://uche.ogbuji.net > Founding Partner, Zepheira http://zepheira.com > Author, Ndewo, Colorado http://uche.ogbuji.net/ndewo/ > Founding editor, Kin Poetry Journal http://wearekin.org > Editor & Contributor, TNB > http://www.thenervousbreakdown.com/author/uogbuji/ > http://copia.ogbuji.net http://www.linkedin.com/in/ucheogbuji > http://twitter.com/uogbuji
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
