[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: XML should NOT be a new programming language
> From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@t...] > Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 1:42 PM > > At 10:52 AM 04/03/02 +0000, Francis Norton wrote: > >Yes - you can implement XML interfaces between components in at > least four ways: > > > >[1] pass an XML document > >[2] pass an XML DOM > >[3] pass a schema-equivalent programming language object (using > tools for automatic schema <-> class conversion) > >[4] pass an event stream > > > >Our experiences suggest that [3] and [4] are best for > high-volume performance-critical server-side finance applications. > > You're buying some performance. You're giving up a lot of the > things that make XML worthwhile, in particular no binary > dependencies on any particular hardware, OS, or whatever. > Your call. But it feels like a lousy bargain, architecturally, > compared to [1]. -Tim You're right that [2]-[4] are more tightly coupled (Using Larry Constantine's definition of coupling). That would lead to the conclusion that [1] would lead to a better design. However it's worth observing that any of [2] and [4] can easily be wrapped to appear as [1]. I've been working with Sean McGrath on the XPipe system. My hope is that one outcome of the system will be that if one uses the framework to wrap serialization/deserialization for DOM or SAX processing, then the framework can locally optimize the linkage of adjacent pipeline components without losing the general ability to pass documents. David
|
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
|