Re: "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basicprinciples
David Lee scripsit: > Is there really such a dearth of full XML processors that MicroXML > has value over simply coding to simpler XML by convention ? No, of course not. It's the Really Simple Data Model that makes MicroXML interesting, which is why I resist any attempts to complicate it, with the possible exception of PIs in a very limited way. Everything is an element, and an element has a map from attribute names to values and a sequence including elements or strings or both. > Noone is making you use the full (and ugly?) breath of XML in your > documents - and (IMHO) Unlike SGML, there is a *plethora* of full XML > parsers and processors available, yea even in the Browser. Right. But unless you are usiung a complete XML stack (XQuery/XSLT and XML database), eventually you have to bind your XML to some third-generation language, and that's where full XML is a big pain. The Really Simple Data Model is really easy to work with. > "Why not just use XML ?" Or for that matter, JSON. What is the value > add of a *new* standard. If JSON is sufficient, use it. If not, MicroXML provides a data model simpler than JSON's but compatible with full XML. -- Verbogeny is one of the pleasurettes John Cowan <email@example.com> of a creatific thinkerizer. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan --Peter da Silva
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
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