[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
On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 13:41, Tim Bray wrote: > 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 If they're just passing the information within a single program or a single pipeline (think a stack of SAX filters), then [2-3-4] make sense. Once you cross that boundary (which can be kind of blurry), then you're completely right that [1] offers the most flexibility by far. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com
|
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
|