Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: attribute order (RE: Syntax Sugar and XML information models)
 > There is an interesting article at Rational's > site, based on a large SW development on which there had been lots of > measurements taken, that ADA was about twice as easy to maintain > as C. ...and about twice as hard to write. The compilers were very strict and way back when *slow*. I remember going and havign a cup of tea while I waited for a smallish module to compile... > So SGML seems to have adopted named arguments, like command-line > interfaces and ADA and Common LISP, as part of best-practise > sofware engineering as seen in the early 1980s. I think that for loosely typed languages, this is sensible... if you have a look at XEXPR, it shows the unification by allowing attributes to be treated as named parameters, to functions. FWIW. I have come to believe that XML is really all about loose typing and "derivation by extension", where the type is really determined by the structure of the data, rather than by type graphs based upon type identifiers (as found in JAVA et al.). This is why I see type as something you project onto an XML instance: you can test to see if it conforms to a type, and thereby declare that it is/is not of that type, but the data is not intrinsically of *any* type. This unifies "implements", "extends", "is-a" and "has-a". In such a world, unordered parameter lists/attribute lists make a great deal of sense... 
|
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
|
|||||||||
