[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Syntax + object model
We had OpenDoc for that. And Corba. And COM. And then there were Groves. And RDF. and... An object model often reflects more compromises than you can shake a stick at, and risks being either so ambiguous or so context-specific as to be useless. Gustaf Liljegren wrote: > Hi all, > > Maybe 5 years to late, but I never really understood the argument about why > a standardized syntax is better than a standardized object model. It sounds > right, but I can't explain why. > > Imagine XML like a standardized object model of various node types, with no > rules whatsoever about the serialization format. Why would such a standard > have less chance to survive? > > Also, imagine XML like a standardized object model PLUS a standardized > syntax. Why would such a standard have less chance to survive? > > Gustaf > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
|