Another try

atark at thepipeline.net atark at thepipeline.net
Fri Jun 29 04:33:35 PDT 2001


On Thursday 28 June 2001 11:05 am, you wrote:
>   XML cannot *help* but be written in such a way that one could write
>   a backend in any language -- so long as said language has an XML
>   Parser available -- that's what XML was intended for in the first
>   place. Now, how *easily* it is to actually write a backend which
>   utilizes that XML is a whole new story.

Writing a backend is not that difficult.  The parser does all the "hard" 
stuff. 

>   I'll tell you who cares how it gets done - anyone writing the
>   code will - most definately - care how it gets done. You're
>   coming from the perspective purely as a DTD/Schema designer:
>   "We're just going to create some tags that abstract what a
>   user may need to do, and let those backend guys write reams
>   and reams of program logic to figure it all out - the profile
>   writers certainly won't care how they do it."
>
>   Well, of course the profile writers won't care what language
>   the backend is written in, or how it is implemented in said
>   language. But they'll care when they find that all the backends
>   totally suck - when they work at all - and don't allow them to
>   do the things they need because the DTD/Schema guys designed
>   something way too simple, thus requiring much to much complexity
>   in the program logic for the backend(s) to do anything slightly
>   usefull at all.

The last thing we should be doing is designing an XML syntax where the goal 
is to make it easy to write a backend.  You can't tell be HTML was designed 
to make it easy to program a browser.  :-)  

--Andy
atark at thepipeline.net
-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to alfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list