[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Re: I can XInclude where I bloody want to

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Re: I can XInclude where I bloody want to
• From: Eric Bohlman <ebohlman@e...>
• Date: Wed, 01 May 2002 16:00:18 -0500
• In-reply-to: <200205011906.g41J6Xdn021557@s...>
• Organization: OMS Development

5/1/02 2:06:32 PM, Mike Brown <mike@s...> wrote:
>I just keep thinking back to MSXML and whitespace, though. There's an example
>of a processor bucking the trend, and on the whole, no one is really suffering
>because of it. I think the reason for this is that most people pick an XSLT
>processor, code to its quirks, its features and its APIs, and they stick with
>it.

"I just keep thinking back to Netscape and unclosed quoted attributes, though.  There's an example of 
a browser bucking the trend, and on the whole, no one is really suffering because of it.  I think the 
reason for this is that most people pick a Web browser, code to its quirks, its features and its 
APIs, and they stick with it."

[historical note: when the Netscape folks made internal implementation changes to their parser, many 
HTML documents that had unclosed quoted attribute strings simply broke, as in large chunks of the 
content not being displayed]

The danger of coding to a processor's quirks is that you have no idea whether those quirks exist for 
deliberate reasons, or are accidents of internal implementation details that might eventually be 
changed with no conscious attention to the quirks.  I wouldn't write code that depended on a CPU 
returning a particular value upon division by zero unless it were documented.  Solid design is 
preferable to kewl hacks (I'm reminded of Gerald Weinberg's story about the group developing an 
assembler for an early CPU.  They managed to find a perfect hash function that mapped each opcode 
into a single byte, so they didn't have to implement chaining or probing.  But then the spec for the 
CPU changed, a new opcode was added, and try as they could, the group couldn't find a perfect hash 
function anymore.  So they had to go back and implement a standard hash lookup anyway, so all the 
effort, and more, that went into the kewl hack was wasted).

• References:
  • Re: Re: I can XInclude where I bloody want to
    • From: Mike Brown <mike@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: SOAP and the Web
• Next by Date: Re: SOAP and the Web
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: I can XInclude where I bloody want to
• Next by thread: Re: Re: I can XInclude where I bloody want to
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread