[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: syntax, model
> mc@x... (Mike Champion) writes: > >The best is the enemy of the good. > > In the case of DOM, the twisted semi-generic mess was the enemy of the > useful. > > Nor does that epigram push strongly against my conclusion, which > includes a range - the further you get from the syntax, the deeper the > poison runs. The epigram's ok as far as it goes, but I disagree with the poison tasting. The cases mentioned (XPath etc) do suggest that distance from syntax is proportional to toxicity, *but* all these cases have one-size-fits-all semantics. Closer to the syntax (as in DOM), the model and a particular (abstract) syntax are tightly bound, even equivalent. But meaningful communication depends on some level of shared semantics. So ideally we should perhaps be looking at looser coupling between syntax and semantics. It shouldn't be necessary to buy into a whole package of meaning (a company's invoice structure) but be able to map selectively between local models in a global environment, choosing the syntax that best fits. The use of purpose-specific XML languages has an implicit alignment to the single-model approach, and that I think is where the problem lies. The model is the baby, the syntax merely the bathwater. I personally think using an uber-framework about syntax and business-specific models is the only way around this, and the RDF/OWL approach seems a very good candidate. Cheers, Danny.
|
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
|