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

Re: Feasibility of "do all application coding in the XMLlangua

  • From: Michael Glavassevich <mrglavas@c...>
  • To: Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@a...>
  • Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 12:01:37 -0500

Re:  Feasibility of "do all application coding in the XMLlangua

Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@a...> wrote on 12/04/2008 10:14:59 AM:

> Costello, Roger L. wrote:
> >
> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-patterns/
> >>
> >> The gist is in Appendix F
> >>    
> >
> > Thanks Rick!
> >
> > Let me see if I understand correctly:
> >
> > Want to create an XML Schema that is broadly adopted?
> >
> > Some of your users will use data binding tools to map the XML
> Schema constructs into data structures in an imperative programming language?
> >
> > Then don't use any of the XML Schema constructs listed below.
> >  
> Yes.The abstract says "This specification provides a set of basic [XML
> Schema 1.0] <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-patterns/#XMLSchema>
> patterns known to be interoperable between state of the art databinding
> implementations."
>
> I would say "check whether your implementation supports these elements"
> or "substitute less strong requirements" (e.g. use built-in primitives
> rather than built-in derived types.)  "Don't use these" is not
> necessarily the can-do response.
>
> Also, one of the points is that some elements are only used in some
> circumstances or with certain values (hence all those patterns), so it
> is not as easy as simply ruling some in and some out.  (For example,
> IIRC at one stage there was talk that maxOccurs should only be 1 or
> unbounded (sorry I didn't check this) because implementations may
> implement a value maxOccurs="1000" by reserving 1000 objects or rows or
> whatever, blowing out memory I guess.)

If you're talking about schema processors, Xerces (and perhaps other implementations) have overcome this, at least for the common cases, where it uses a counter to process maxOccurs instead of creating a gigantic state machine.

> Some of them are surprising. For example, <all> is just a trivial
> transform of a sequence with optionality, that is allowed. So I am
> really surprised that it is in the poo-pile.
>
> Cheers
> Rick Jelliffe


Thanks.

Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: mrglavas@c...

E-mail: mrglavas@a...



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]


PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.