Interesting Monday.

[Matthew Sergeant (EML)]

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	James Robertson [SMTP:jamesr at steptwo.com.au]
> 
> At 20:29 1/02/1999 , Matthew Sergeant (EML) wrote:
> 
>   | My problem was slightly different. I needed to be ready for the 5.0
> browsers
>   | (probably IE5, although I'd prefer NS5), and XML seemed ideal because
> we
>   | would be displaying/editing documents that look like data (or data
> that
>   | looks like a document if you like). We really needed an object
> database, but
>   | I needed to get moving quickly (a typical web project: "Can we have it
>   | yesterday"). Learning an object database wasn't a possibility. I
> already
>   | knew XML. So I looked at it like this - we could have it 2 ways:
>   | 
>   | 1) Store XML now, process into HTML now, Transmit XML in the future.
>   | 
>   | 2) Store in RDBMS now, process into HTML now, process into XML in the
>   | future.
> 
> I would personally recommend a third option:
> 
> 3) Store in RDBMS now, process into XML, process this into HTML now.
>    Process the XML into whatever you want in the future.
> 
> 
	Nonononono. :)

	This generates probably 5% more overhead than I have already (the
RDBMS). XML doesn't parse quickly (well, OK, it parses quickly, but not
compared to reading data from an RDBMS). When you are processing tens of XML
files per second this becomes a huge problem.

	Matt.


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)