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

RE: Application Design

• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• To: francis@r...
• Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 09:57:46 -0500

Unfortunately, they do.  Usually I see this 
where to-the-metal programmers learn 
just enough to connect the new 
to what they already know.   I've been in 
cubes where select nodes is about where 
they stop, and then they start programming 
procedurally.   XPath isn't trivial to learn 
on the first pass, and if they practice solo Extreme, 
they are likely to try something that works 
before something that is appropriate. 

Later they realize how awkward what they are 
doing is, or in the midst of yetAnotherHowStupidThisStuffIs 
conversation, someone points out that XPath is 
probably easier than what they have.  

XSLT isn't always the right solution, but where one 
needs to start at a higher conceptual level 
of application properties, eg, high level 
authoring languages, it is a good cheap way 
to proceed.   I wonder how many developers 
prototype XMLAuthorView->XSLT->(XML|Text)RenderView 
systems, and once they are sure the properties 
are what they need, then bind to objects.

Tool churning is a serious problem.   For 
example, as much as I have always been a 
PFE kinda guy, XML Schemas at any large size 
really do better with an IDE.  I'm all for 
mature IDEs.

Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Francis Norton [mailto:francis@r...]

We have found it fairly effective, though the lack of debuggers has been
a nuisance. There is a learning process, but everyone using XML needs to
learn XPath anyway (*please* don't tell me anyone is seriously
programming complex transformations by using pure DOM navigation) and
once you've go that, the rest of XSLT isn't that indigestible -
certainly no more of a leap than going from sequential to event-based
programming. 

I suspect that most popular programming language more complicated than
DOS batch language have an IDE or two, and a user base split between
those who understand the fundamentals and those who just know how to use
the IDE.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Application Design
    • From: Francis Norton <francis@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Application Design
• Next by Date: Re: Application Design
• Previous by thread: RE: Application Design
• Next by thread: Re: Application Design
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread