Storing Lots of Fiddly Bits (was Re: What is XML for?)

[Clark Evans]

Paul Prescod wrote:
> But note that a DOM-on-the-bottom is the opposite of the architecture that
> I am speaking out against. I'm concerned about people who want to layer
> the DOM on "top" of things that do not look substantially like XML. In
> that case you are covering up an optimized, purpose-built abstaction with
> a homogenized "dumb tree" layer. That's a step backwards. Note that even
> the DOM creators do not view an XML-DOM as a "universal tree API." That's
> why there are several variants of the DOM -- for XML, HTML, CSS etc.

The only time you may want to take this step backwards is if you are
providing an generic drill down tool for database navigation... 

Once you have the primary-key/oid for the object in 
question, you would most likely want to switch to a 
smarter, class specific interface.

:) Clark

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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
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)