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

RE: Xml Messaging

• From: Mark Birbeck <Mark.Birbeck@i...>
• To: xml-dev@i...
• Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 22:18:59 +0100

Rick Sanderson wrote:
> I am working on a generic framework for client/server/distributed
> apps, and have decided that XML belongs in the messaging subsystem. My
> question basically boils down to this:  should XML messaging be based
> on a "metadata" language, or on a "domain" language?

This raises its head in many situations, including storage (particularly
in relation to objects). I think the answer is in the realm of
validation.

Define a 'domain' language and you can validate the contents; use a
'metadata' language and you can only validate the structure of that
language. The contents could be a right mess and still get through. Of
course you could then build a validating layer on top of the 'metadata'
language, which is what RDF tends to do. If the validating you need to
do is far more elaborate than can be provided by a DOM then you lose
nothing by using a 'metadata' language, since you are going to have to
do a lot of post-parser processing anyway. Otherwise, I'd go with a
'domain' language.

Mark

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Xml Messaging
    • From: "Rick Sanderson" <ricks@f...>

• Prev by Date: RE: RFC: Attributes and XML-RPC
• Next by Date: RE: Attributes vs. text content (Was Re: RFC: Attributes and XML-RPC)
• Previous by thread: Re: Xml Messaging
• Next by thread: Re: Xml Messaging
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread