RE: terra incognita
Quite awhile back I wondered out loud if it was possible to merge declarative schemas and object-oriented languages: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2000/05/03/lowery/index.html To my mind, the biggest problem with OO languages is that they convolute the data model with the processing model (BTW, this can be done in XML just as well: "What is JDF?" http://www.cip4.org), which makes it hard to deconstruct one from the other. If, on the other hand, one separates out the internal data structures and their declarative constraints from that of the processing model, you have several advantages: 1) constraints on the internal data model are clearly articulated 2) the data model is shareable (schema as contract) 3) methods can be loosely coupled to data structures, yet still retain OO characteristics - methods are bound to the data structures they access/mutate - more than one set of methods can be used on the same data structures. - maxim: data models stabilize, process models continually morph 4) simplifies transactions, rollbacks, and change notifications based on data model manipulations I think the efforts at XML data binding pretty much follow this path, but the linkage between any arbitrary OO language and the physical data model of XML is fraught with inconsistencies and lack of granularity control. In order for this type of thing to work well, I think both schemas and methods have to be brought together into one language. Two cents, Jeff
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