Re: limits of the generic
At 07:56 PM 9/27/2002 -0400, Simon St.Laurent wrote: >That information doesn't always come in neat table/object boxes. > >That a set of data types developed for efficient storage in a particular >implementation situation may or may not work in other situations, or, >more generally. > >Even getting SQL and Java (or other programming environ) people to agree >about data modeling issues is difficult enough that I can't figure out >where they get the courage to think their values are appropriate for the >rest of the universe. > >That the perspectives of programmers matter more than the opinions of >non-programmers. > >In short, although I work with both Java and SQL, I do my damndest to >keep those perspectives in their own contexts and not pretend they have >anything at all to do with markup. > >Funny thing is, people who can't recognize those boundaries yammer on >and on about how the boundaries don't exist, and keep producing enormous >piles of junk that purport to organize the markup world in ways that >have really not a thing to do with marking up. Hmmm...let's ignore for now what's wrong with people who disagree with you and try a simpler question. If I take an integer out of a relational database and give it to a Java program, I would often like the Java program to know that it is an integer. Not just for one XML vocabulary, because I want to write tools that can handle more than one XML vocabulary. What's wrong with that? I would like to have a small number of constructs, such as hrefs, that can be used across XML vocabularies. What's wrong with that? Jonathan
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