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

RE: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)

• To: 'Joe English' <jenglish@f...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 09:13:22 -0500

I am slightly aware of that.  I suggested that 
the Infoset be the first thing taught in an 
XML course.  Then the programmers at hand 
said, "Don't confuse us with abstractions. 
Show us the code."  And so it goes.

Ever peel an apple with a screwdriver, 
or fix a loose cabinet door by bashing an 
apple against it and twisting?  Before DOM, 
we had apples and pearing knives built 
to local wants instead of generalized spec.

We don't need interoperable APIs as long as 
we have Microsoft C# and Sun Java toolkits. ;-)

len

From: Joe English [mailto:jenglish@f...]

Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

> Make no apologies for the DOM.  Before it,
> what did we have except the ESIS?

That's comparing apples and screwdrivers.
ESIS isn't an API, it's a set of requirements
that an SGML API should implement; it's the
SGML equivalent of the XML InfoSet.

Before the DOM, we had Netscape-flavored JavaScript
and MSIE-flavored JavaScript.  *That* was the problem
that the DOM tries to solve.

There were and are plenty of language-specific APIs for
SGML/XML processing, and none of them need to interoperate
with each other.  This isn't something that the W3C needs to
standardize IMO.

• Prev by Date: RE: Greenspun's tenth law rears its head: was InnerXml is like printf (WAS: Underwhelmed)
• Next by Date: Re: InnerXml is like printf (WAS: Underwhelmed)
• Previous by thread: RE: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Next by thread: RE: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread