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

Re: Object-oriented serialization (Was Re: Some questions)

• From: Colas Nahaboo <Colas.Nahaboo@s...>
• To: Vane Lashua <vlashua@R...>
• Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 18:10:57 +0100

Vane Lashua writes:
> I think you're mixing apples and oranges.

I see it the other way: I try to make people realize that they are the same,
and the current artifical limits in the XML syntax make people stuble on
artificial syntax problems.

> An even simpler declaration of your example below -- and correct in XML --
> would be:
> <Point value="12in,2cm;RFFx,G0,B0" />

This is not XML. You invent a sub-language to describe the contents of the
value attribute. You will then need XML and a XML parser to understand the
outer XML, and you will have to invent and specify the inner language, and
design and implement the parser, which is *more* complex than an unified "XML
2" language. (note that SVG did just that with the contents of the path
element :-). People tend to invent plenty of these sub-languages and mentally
hide them under the rug, failing to see that the did not simplified anything,
just made things more complex at more places in many different - and often
unspecified - ways.

> XML is a storage medium. Java source code is a storage medium. XML may
> contain Java source code syntax, as Java source code may contain XML syntax,
> but both need processors to do more.

Yep, but if you look at my example, you could see that I got rid of any
sub-language!!! I only need an XML parser, nothing else at the parsing level.
I still need the upper semantic level, of course, but at least I dont have to
have plenty of different lexical parsers (and specs) to describe my data.
The SVG example is striking. To implement a SVG viewer, you need to have an
XML parser, plenty of other parsers to parse the sub-languages invented in the
different attributes and contents of the SVG XML, including a full CSS and
HTML parser...

Note that I descibed only the object instances, NOT the classes structures
(this belongs to schemas, not to the XML level), and they are not java, they
could represent C++, common lisp, python,... objects!

--
Colas Nahaboo, Koala/Dyade/Bull @ INRIA Sophia, http://www.inria.fr/koala/colas


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 unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • RE: Object-oriented serialization (Was Re: Some questions)
    • From: Vane Lashua <vlashua@R...>

• Prev by Date: Re: [SML] Whether to support Attribute or not?
• Next by Date: Re: Object-oriented serialization (Was Re: Some questions)
• Previous by thread: RE: Object-oriented serialization (Was Re: Some questions)
• Next by thread: RE: Object-oriented serialization (Was Re: Some questions)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread