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

Re: Integration Models (WAS RE: parser models)

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Integration Models (WAS RE: parser models)
• From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
• Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 19:17:58 +0000
• In-reply-to: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE0DF71D@h...>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE0DF71D@h...>

"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...> wrote:

| Is there a confusion between loose coupling as an API/data model and 
| loose coupling as file types on the wire?  While both are viable, I 
| wonder if we would have the same confusion if the InfoSet were taught 
| before the syntax. 

Infoset before syntax is a decent idea, but starting with infosets could
be just as confusing as starting with syntax.  IMHO, it's best to start
with an explanation of and emphasis on hierarchic structure (the way the
TEI materials do, for instance, except that they were written before the
infoset concept, and use the syntax for examples).  

When it comes to syntax, I've found, the learning curve isn't hurdled
until tag omission, of all things, is understood.  I don't think teaching
XML is any easier than teaching SGML; if anything, it's probably harder. 

• References:
  • Integration Models (WAS RE: parser models)
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: W3C Schema Question
• Next by Date: RE: Fwd: War of Attrition (was: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial))
• Previous by thread: RE: Integration Models (WAS RE: parser models)
• Next by thread: RE: Turn off the Filters (WAS RE: [Off-Topic] Who/What is f lowserve.com? (A Report to Sender Bogosity))
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread