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

Re: Don't you need an XML Virtual Machine ?

• To: "Oleg A. Paraschenko" <olpa@x...>
• Subject: Re: Don't you need an XML Virtual Machine ?
• From: Philippe Poulard <Philippe.Poulard@s...>
• Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 17:01:57 +0200
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <20060330084121.065bc59b.olpa@x...>
• References: <442A73B0.9070708@s...> <20060330084121.065bc59b.olpa@x...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050511

Hi Oleg,

Oleg A. Paraschenko wrote:
> Hi Philippe,
> 
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 13:46:56 +0200
> Philippe Poulard <Philippe.Poulard@s...> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hi,
>>
>>RefleX 0.1.3, a general-purpose XML Virtual Machine, is available here :
>>http://reflex.gforge.inria.fr/
> 
> 
> I used to utilize the buzzword "XML Virtual Machine" for my works, but now
> I'm in doubt. What "XML Virtual Machine" could be? What properties are
> expected from it?

I would answer the same for Java : any machine that could translate XML 
in something that can run on this machine

I called my executable XML "Active Tags" ; Active Tags just specifies a 
behaviour, not how you could implement it : if you want to write an 
interpreter or a compiler, translate XML to Java code (or any other 
language), load precompiled classes, or combine several of them, you're 
welcome.

RefleX is an implementation in Java of Active Tags. I find it close to 
the idea of what people would think of an "XML Virtual Machine" : a 
general-purpose environment that can perform programs made with tags.
The idea of "general-purpose" is more important than "tags" : a syntax à 
la XQuery could be a candidate, but XQuery is not a "general-purpose" 
language ; thus a pure implementation of XQuery can't be an "XML Virtual 
Machine", although it could be extended to.

Of course, all that can be discussed :)

> 
> And are you sure that just using XML syntax for programming qualifies for
> the proud title of "XML Virtual Machine"?

As I said previously, I think it's not enough.

XML technologies like XML and XPath are used in Active Tags to achieve 
things that are not necessary related to XML.

> 
> 
>>In this release, you'll find tutorials for mapping SQL to arbitrary 
>>complex XML structures, and for experimenting the Active Schema Language
>> : express constraints on XML documents that you can't achieve with DTD,
>> 
>>W3C XML Schema, neither Relax NG, and define custom semantic data types.
>>
>>Enjoy !
>>

-- 
Cordialement,

               ///
              (. .)
  --------ooO--(_)--Ooo--------
|      Philippe Poulard       |
  -----------------------------
  http://reflex.gforge.inria.fr/
        Have the RefleX !

• References:
  • Don't you need an XML Virtual Machine ?
    • From: Philippe Poulard <Philippe.Poulard@s...>
  • Re: Don't you need an XML Virtual Machine ?
    • From: "Oleg A. Paraschenko" <olpa@x...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Namespaces, Xml Schema Whitespace normalization, xs:anyURI,and URILiterals in XPath 2.0
• Next by Date: [OT] International Conference on Complex Systems, Boston, MA, June 25 - 30, 2006
• Previous by thread: Re: Don't you need an XML Virtual Machine ?
• Next by thread: <offtopic> The Fallacy of Reification
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread