Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are
On Tuesday, October 22, 2002, at 07:21 PM, Jonathan Robie wrote: > At 06:07 PM 10/22/2002 +0100, Alaric B. Snell wrote: >> I think that's the whole problem with XML, though :-) >> >> Nobody's yet given a good reason why data encapsulation is bad. > > I didn't say that data encapsulation is bad - it's fundamentally > useful in object oriented programming languages. Java and C++ would be > much less useful without data encapsulation. You know, I'd really like it if people would stop referring to those two evil twins as "Object Oriented" because, while they manage to fake a few features of OO, they aren't. Based on a couple of other comments like objects "hiding away data" I can see the reaction against compiler enforced encapsulation. Its bad. Pure and simple. Public Protected Private is a menace to modern software development because 1) The average programmer doesn't make good choices about when to use these 2) They make automatic serialization that makes sense difficult to automate 3) Invariably some unanticipated case arises where something that needs overriding or accessing is not public and therefor, a large body of potentially useful code is rendered worthless (the HTMLEditor Toolkit in Java's Swing package is an excellent example of this). Also, I'm enjoying this thread a lot because I'm gaining some insight into why XML. Please do continue.
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