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

Re: Re: Native XML Interfaces

• From: "Timothy W. Cook" <timothywayne.cook@gmail.com>
• To: Kurt Cagle <kurt.cagle@gmail.com>
• Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2013 10:30:46 -0300

Kurt,

On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Kurt Cagle <kurt.cagle@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tim,
>
> In 2009 I was ready to write off SVG as a standard that failed.
...

> the scale. However, they were fighting DoD requirements that mandated
> supporting a ten year old browser specification with no plugins. This is a
> time frame problem, and one that ultimately I think they'll be able to work
> around, especially as they are able to offer the advanced technology to
> other customers.

This is good news about SVG.

>
> XForms has been a thorn in the side of the WHATWG for a long time, primarily
> because it ran very much counter to the prevailing mantra of "JavaScript
> uber alles". Except for a few key partisans, it is virtually forgotten.

After reviewing the options I am becoming one of those partisians.
Even though my inexperience with XPath is not making it easy. What is
easy is to see how the separation of model and view makes for a much
cleaner solution for complex applications, than the alternatives.

> Instead jQuery solutions have achieved near uniform dominance, in part
> because it fit most closely into the dot-notation paradigm that so many web
> developers have been convinced is the way to write such applications.

The rise of OOP has been a wonderful thing for systems development.
But OO modelling is not the solution to all problems.  Just like SQL
wasn't.  People are lazy, they learn one thing in school and stick
with it for a career.  By and large, the people you find on this (and
similar) mailing lists are not representative of that wider IT
community though. More publication on blogs and social media about
these issues will eventually help spread the word that you have to
have more than one tool in your chest.  Or spend you career on only
one type of solution.

> I'm
> less optimistic about its future, even though XForms 2 is moving towards
> working with JSON as well as XML, but I still feel that it nicely solves a
> whole class of problems that the endless proliferation of other frameworks
> don't.

I wish there was more focus on XML Schema 1.1 support.  I know that it
has been pointed out to me on this list (I think it was here) before
that XForms is about forms not about validation.  But what I am seeing
is that I have complex schemas defined and I am having to duplicate
that in constraints in the model.

Of course this is _my_ perspective but it seems to me that a schema
should be able to be referenced as _the_ model.  I am referring to
going beyond support for simpleTypes.  Support for complexTypes with
multiple substitution groups and asserts would be awesome.

Thanks,

Tim


============================================
Timothy Cook, MSc           +55 21 94711995
MLHIM http://www.mlhim.org
Like Us on FB: https://www.facebook.com/mlhim2
Circle us on G+: http://goo.gl/44EV5
Google Scholar: http://goo.gl/MMZ1o
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook

• References:
  • Re: Re: Native XML Interfaces
    • From: Lauren Wood <lauren@textuality.com>
  • Re: Re: Native XML Interfaces
    • From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
  • Re: Re: Native XML Interfaces
    • From: Kurt Cagle <kurt.cagle@gmail.com>