Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: RE: evolvable formats
 I completely agree with Uche's sentiments. When I first saw the RSS brouhaha and read many mentions the need for Ultra-liberal RSS parsers[0] I wondered why they bothered with XML and didn't just use some other format instead. The only reason I can think of is buzzword compliance. [0] http://diveintomark.org/archives/2002/08/13.html#ultraliberal_rss_parser -- PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM Marriage is the only union that has consistently defied management. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Uche Ogbuji [mailto:uche.ogbuji@f...] > Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 9:00 PM > To: Joe Gregorio > Cc: Mike Champion; xml-dev@l...; 'Mark Pilgrim' > > > > > 1 - Politics happens, Evolution is continuous, deal with it. > > > With technology, as best you can. Don't make technology choices > > > that are fragile in the face of human nature. > > > > I would add: "Don't make technology choices that are fragile in the > > face of the currently available toolsets." For example, > using RDF in > > RSS 1.0. > > What does this mean? You might want to look at the > impressive variety of RDF tools listed at > > http://www.ilrt.bristol.ac.uk/discovery/rdf/resources/ > > before answering. > > > > > 2 - Namespaces - work best for mixing instances of well-defined > > > vocabularies/schemas together, they don't work so well > to support > > > evolution or un-typed XML. Schema evolution using namespaces is > > > a Known to Be Hard, TAG-level problem. > > > > I'd generalize your observations here to not just encompass schemas > > but to all types of validation. Validation seems anathma to > evolvable. > > This sounds like the rallying cry of the Knights of Tag Soup. > > Validation is mostly an obstacle to evolution if designed > using the wrong tools in careless hands. > > > > > If you want to leverage commonly deployed code that understands > > > a specific namespace (XHTML, SVG, etc.), the full-blown > Namespaces > > > in XML is your friend, well Real Soon Now anyway. If you just > > > want to disambiguate tags, it has lots of little gotchas > > > (that "RSS 2.0" seems to have been gotten by!) that make it a > > > challenge for people who don't grok its subtleties. (MOST OF > > > THE REAL WORLD!!!) > > Let us not forget that most of the real computing world does > not grok the > subtleties of XML, Java, HTML, PC architecture, e-mail, or > even the Internet. > > Time to shut up shop and go home? I think not. > > > > > 3 - If you don't know exactly what you're dealing with, heuristics > > > beat logic. If the tag is <table> and it has > > > HTML table elements inside it, it's probably an HTML > table! Don't > > > throw it away because it's in the wrong namespace. > > > > I'd say that "heuristics beats validation". > > How are the two supposedly in a fight, again? > > > > This gets into the social aspects of RSS as an 'evolvable' format. > > Many of the feeds are produced by some home grown CMS or are > > even created by hand. This highlights the need for a > > format to be as simple as possible. > > It's based on XML. Therefore, it is impossible for it to be > "as simple as > possible". > > > > The other aspect is that many people implementing RSS may not > > have read the RSS spec (never mind the XML spec) they're just > > using an example RSS file as boilerplate. Again, another 'tools' > > issue. Paraphrasing a conversation > > I had with another developer when he was talking about > creating an RSS feed: > > > > "I thought to my self, I could do this the *right* way and use > > the DOM API in my scripting language and have it take me an hour, > > or I could just use printf and be done in 10 minutes. > > I did the printf thing, it's just a blog." > > Again, why bother with XML? WHy not just make it CSV with > some hand-waving > notes on structure in the spec? People who "do the printf > thing" rarely even > produce WF XML. I see no reason to accommodate such > slovenliness. If one > thinks it's necessary to do so in order to accommodate > everyman, then they > should dispense with the lie that they are using XML. > > > -- > Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc. > http://uche.ogbuji.net http://4Suite.org http://fourthought.com > Apache 2.0 API - > http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-apache/ > Python&XML column: Tour of Python/XML - > http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/09/18/py. > html > Python/Web Services column: xmlrpclib - > http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/w > ebservices/library/ws-pyth10.html > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an > initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> > > The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl> > > 
|
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
|
|||||||||
