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

Re: XML For The Average Monkey

• From: Arjun Ray <arjun.ray@verizon.net>
• To: <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
• Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 23:53:23 -0400

On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 18:02:41 -0500, "Len Bullard"
<cbullard@hiwaay.net> wrote:

| XML is about getting data into and out of systems that may not like
| each other's school teams.  Parser Geeks often overlook meatspace.

Case in point, I think:  I've always been somewhat morbidly fascinated
by all this "XML Data Binding" stuff - JAXB and its kin.  It sounds so
juicily geeky - generating object classes into which some XML "stream"
can be unmarshalled.

I've always been of the view that if this what your system design has
called for, then it is BAD.  Broken As Designed.  While it may make
sense to marshall an object hierarchy into XML - I have some sympathy
for this, but no attempt I've seen has impressed me - the notion that
an XML schema can or will determine what your objects look like has
everything exactly backwards.

How to unmarshall XML into some generic object classes - and how do it
"better" or "faster" or whatever -  I find a profoundly uninteresting
exercise.  Someone mustnot  have thought the problem domain through.  

-- 
"You can survive a poor implementation, but you can't survive a poor
design." - Peter Seebach 

• References:
  • Re: XML For The Average Monkey
    • From: Arjun Ray <arjun.ray@verizon.net>
  • RE: XML For The Average Monkey
    • From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@hiwaay.net>