Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: RFC: Attributes and XML-RPC
 > XML-RPC's simplicity is remarkable, and it's made it much easier to explain > to people, I've found. I don't know if lack of attributes is precisely > why, but the approach overall seems sound. Simon, thanks! Simplicity was *the* goal for XML-RPC, I believe it's the result of leaving out things that we felt an HTML coder would find confusing. No namespaces, no DTDs, no attributes. I think this way of doing things has a place, esp since SOAP is so fully conformant with the latest stuff from W3C. One method for full conformance, one method for transparency. I don't know which approach is going to gain traction, or if they both will. There are SOAP implementations coming online very quickly, and there already are a bunch of implementations of XML-RPC. I think that SOAP defines a good upperbound for XML-RPC. I'm glad it's there. It's also great to Microsoft pushing this stuff too! Anyway, about attributes, I'd like to save them for something super-powerful when we understand how this stuff is being deployed. To me, it feels like a dollar in the bank, that when the technology matures, we have a dividend we can use somewhere down the pike. Also, the discussion on the XML-RPC DG is centered around language-specific hinting. What if you want to hint two languages, not one? What if each language requires a set of configuration info? What if one language requires a hierarchy of configuration info? (That's not hard to imagine, not at all.) Attributes are for wispy little very optional things, if they are for anything at all. I see that there's lots of room for deepening <struct>s for example. The hierarchy in XML-RPC is so meticulously hierarchic so that we could hang stuff off those trees in the future. This goes back to discussions I had with Mohsen Al-Ghosein at Microsoft in March 1998. Once he explained it to me I said YES, that's very cool, let's do it that way. Now we're at the crossroads he imagined, and we've got some people telling us to hurry up and there's no way I want to do that. That's why I brought the issue over here, because people like Simon and Tim and Don Park are here (and Tim Berners-Lee!), and you guys have been dealing with much more complex stuff in arrangements of tagged text than we have. I think you should have a crack at this and help us make the decisions. XML-RPC can belong to XML-DEV as much as it belongs to anyone. But I really want to keep its simplicity as the prime goal. Maybe this is a time to do a little work outside the W3C, sort of a skunkworks thing, let's see what kind of barn we can raise. Dave xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...) 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
