Re: ConciseXML arguments
On Sunday 19 January 2003 17:52, Mike Plusch wrote: > Out of the 50 email messages about > ConciseXML, almost all of the comments > have been of the sort: > "but ConciseXML is not XML 1.0!". > > Although this is a true statement, > how about any comments on the two > key problems that ConciseXML fixes that > are reoccuring issues across the industry. > > 1. XML 1.0 is verbose and is not suitable > for many applications that people would > like to use it for. People invent new > syntax all the time to avoid XML 1.0. > For example, XPATH, XQuery, string > encodings, CSV data, etc. > > 2. There is not a single way in XML 1.0 to > represent data fields that have a key and value > where the key can be any type and the value > can be any type. Use elements for everything and have no distinction between properties-of-this-object and nested-object :-) Or don't nest objects, treat it like an address space: <objectPool root="SAKFDLSFDAN"> <object id="SAKFDLSFDAN" type="Person"> <field name="Name" type="String" value="Alaric Snell" /> <field name="FaveFood" type="Food" value="SP3MDFNDFE" /> </object> <object id="SP3MDFNDFE" type="Food"> .... </object> </objectPool> It's a bit messy, but it works, it enforces the semantic distinctions, and it also rather neatly allows for an arbitrary (cyclic!) graph of interconnections rather than hierarchial single-ownership. Sadly, it's not very nice to look at in XML; I prefer the s-expression approach myself *wicked grin* :-) (Person Name: "Alaric Snell" FaveFood: (Food ...)) ABS -- A city is like a large, complex, rabbit - ARP
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