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

Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are

• To: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
• Subject: Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
• From: tblanchard@m...
• Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 09:32:51 +0200
• Cc: "Alaric B. Snell" <alaric@a...>, Mike Champion <mc@x...>, xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <5.1.0.14.0.20021022131720.041e4cd0@n...>

On Tuesday, October 22, 2002, at 07:21  PM, Jonathan Robie wrote:

> At 06:07 PM 10/22/2002 +0100, Alaric B. Snell wrote:
>> I think that's the whole problem with XML, though :-)
>>
>> Nobody's yet given a good reason why data encapsulation is bad.
>
> I didn't say that data encapsulation is bad - it's fundamentally 
> useful in object oriented programming languages. Java and C++ would be 
> much less useful without data encapsulation.

You know, I'd really like it if people would stop referring to those 
two evil twins as "Object Oriented" because, while they manage to fake 
a few features of OO, they aren't.

Based on a couple of other comments like objects "hiding away data" I 
can see the reaction against compiler enforced encapsulation.  Its bad. 
  Pure and simple.  Public Protected Private is a menace to modern 
software development because

1) The average programmer doesn't make good choices about when to use 
these
2) They make automatic serialization that makes sense difficult to 
automate
3) Invariably some unanticipated case arises where something that needs 
overriding or accessing is not public and therefor, a large body of 
potentially useful code is rendered worthless (the HTMLEditor Toolkit 
in Java's Swing package is an excellent example of this).

Also, I'm enjoying this thread a lot because I'm gaining some insight 
into why XML.  Please do continue.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
    • From: "Alaric B. Snell" <alaric@a...>

• References:
  • Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML 1.1 documents
• Next by Date: Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!
• Previous by thread: Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
• Next by thread: Re: XML as "passive data" (Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread