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

RE: What is XML For?


perl pack
> > > No way. Have you ever looked at a spec for a binary file format?
Most
> of
> > > the ones I've deal with have taken a few hours to bang out an
> > > implementation of (except TIFF; implementations of TIFF are never
> > > finished...)
> >
> > For you and me, yes. For the average business programmer? I
disagree.
> > We're talking about the kind of people who spend most of their day
in
> > Visual Basic.
> 
> But THEY don't even want XML; they probably don't find wandering a DOM
> tree
> any more friendly than calling whatever passes for Perl's "pack" and
> "unpack"
> in VB. They are the people who want to just have magic serialisation
from
> data structures to strings of bytes.

Good point. There are products (like J2EE 1.4 from what I hear) that
provide OO serialization to/from XML for "free" though.

> 
> > > No it's not... I've got quite a few custom protocols I put
together
> > > lurking around my systems.
> >
> > If it is running on YOUR SYSTEMS then it isn't deployed in the sense
I
> > mean. I'm asking have you ever tried to deploy a protocol that would
> > have dozens of independent implementations and thousands of users?
> > That's _really hard_ and many good protocols never make the leap.
> 
> That's purely a problem of adoption in the protocol marketplace, not
> difficulty of development.
> 
> But I'm a little WG right now developing a protocol to replace IMAP,
and I
> helped out a bit in developing the PNG image file format (which has
dozens
> of
> independent implementations and zillions of users). I wasn't there at
the
> beginning, but they did pretty much what I'd have done if I was (he
says,
> modestly).
> 
> PNG is a nice example of a file format. It's extensible by third
parties
> to
> create their own specialist metadata that can just be ignored by
> applications
> that don't understand it. Better than XML, those extra chunks (sort of
> like
> tags) can be marked with metadata about how applications that don't
> understand them should handle them.
> 
> 1) The chunk might be something like an indication that the image data
is
> compressed in some bizarre new way. In which case, it is marked so
that
> applications that don't understand it are forced to reject the file.
> 
> 2) If not, the chunk still might be something like a thumbnail image
or a
> histogram of colours used in the image; if a processor changes the
image
> but
> doesn't understand this chunk it should remove it since it won't be up
to
> date if the image is changed
> 
> 3) Finally, the chunk should just be ignored, and left untouched if
the
> image
> is altered. Stuff like copyright notices and so on.

That sounds like a rather wise thing to do. Any idea why the XML spec
doesn't include mechanisms for meta-model information?

> Just to reverse positions, I see XML as useful for marking up text...
but
> it's not well fitted for data. As far as I can tell there's been a
> conceptual
> bleed from:
> 
> This is <emphasis>tasty</emphasis> cheese
> 
> (taking a string of text then slipping a few tags in here and there to
add
> abstract style information)
> 
> to:
> 
> <document>
>   <title>Alaric's Cheese Bible</title>
>   <para>...</para>
> </document>
> 
> (extending that to expressing metadata, but still expressing the
metadata
> in
> terms of abstract styles; remove all the tags and you get:
> 
> Alaric's Cheese Bible
> 
> ...paragraphs...
> 
> <title> is really just an abstract style with a schema constraint
added
> that
> you can only have one, and as the first thing in a document).
> 
> to:
> 
> <cheese>
>   <name>Cheddar</name>
>   <colour>Yellowish</colour>
>   <price currency="UKP" unit="kg">2.50</price>
> </cheese>
> 
> ...without enough stopping to think if it's a good idea.
> 
> I'm not even sure if the latter was what the W3C intended when coming
up
> with
> XML; the introduction at http://www.w3c.org/XML/ states that it was
> designed
> for publishing, not data transfer, but it's becoming used for data
> transfer
> anyway.
> 
> Is this just people noticing that something should be used for more
than
> it
> was intended for (which I'm suspicious enough of :-), or is it people
> misapplying something out of foolish over optimism?
> 
> Whose idea *was* it to use XML for data interchange? The W3C seems to
> disavow
> responsibility in the first paragraph of that introduction. But
somebody
> somehwere made a mental leap from "styling a human-readable document"
to
> "data transfer". There are gray areas between the two, since an
invoice
> might
> well be considered to need to be both a readable document and a piece
of
> data, but nobody seems to be putting <?xml-stylesheet?> PIs in their
XML
> purchase orders, do they?
> 
> > > email,faveFoods
> > > "alaric@a...","Cheese"+"Yoghurt"+"Pizza"
> >
> > And what about recursive hiearchies? You can keep hacking the CSV
format
> > but eventually you'll reach a point of diminishing returns.
> 
> Some might argue that XML is also being hacked to a point of
diminishing
> returns :-)

Some might. But some might argue that most C and Perl code is ugly.


PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.