[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Getting specs/standards right (was UPA and schema handling
Not the state of the object, the design of the object, so I should have said 'class'. I take your point, though. An object is a type. Stay in that realm, and we agree. On the other hand, there are those messy methods and the fact that a framework is not one class, but lots of them, 'namespaces' seems to be what Visual Studio.Net calls them. Nice tool, btw. I'm enjoying it. This is one of the best IDEs from MS that I've worked with for ease, intelligence, just-enough-assistance, decent if baroque help, and so on. There are times I want to say namespace = type. ;-) len From: Dare Obasanjo [mailto:dareo@m...] What do you mean by "schemas corresponding to object frameworks"? If you mean schemas generated from classes in an OO language they definitely would be much simpler than schemas designed for validating document-centric XML by humans. A serialized object state is basically a complex type containing a sequence of simple types and/or nested complex types of the same form. All you need is DTDs + simple types (e.g. Microsoft's XDR) and you'd have hit the 80% of the usage requirements for generating schemas from classes. The complexity in XSD-based object<->XML frameworks (which has caused much consternation in the XML Web Services world) is the fact that one has to map the additional complexity of XML schema to OO constructs when no such concepts exist in the OO world.
|
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
|