Re: COMPLEXITY BIG ISSUE

[rweltman@netscape.com (Rob Weltman)]

David RR Webber wrote:

> Message text written by Rob Weltman
> >
>   Think of a SAX parser as a compiler. You need a compiler to turn source
> into executables, and you need a SAX parser (or something comparable) if
> you are processing XML in a streaming way. The SAX spec allows you to
> choose your parser from any compatible provider (Sun, IBM, Apache), much as
> a language spec allows you to choose a compiler from various vendors. The
> Apache provider now supports XML Schema, and I expect the others to do so
> as well. You can use Apache for development now, and Sun or IBM later, if
> you want to.
>
>   SAX is very, very widely deployed - hardly something waiting for a use.
>
> Rob
>
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> Rob - I say again - this is a programmer centric view of the world.  I look
> at that
> Apache stuff - I understand it - and I know SAX.  I still say - 'for
> what?'.
>
> Given the use domain of Apache I could see someone saying something like:
>
> OK - lets implement server side includes using XML for both DOM and SAX.
> This will allow us to have resolved business objects as content.
>
> Or, lets implement support for an XML mechanism to request/respond certain
> parameters out of the Apache server environment.
>
> Now if I go back get these two running - go over to the Web site you
> quoted,
> I'll see all this - and I can have concrete idea of what/where/how.
> Enhanced functionality.   I also get a sense of going forward - that if I
> implement this - it will be enhanced and supported.  Right now - all you
> have is a testbed - with no focus.
>
> Thanks, DW.

David,

  The starting point for this particular thread was that it is not worth defining ebXML messages using XML Schema (at this time) because there are no tools (among other reasons), while there are tools for defining and using DTDs. It may well be (for other reasons, primarily the changing definition of XML Schema) that it it not appropriate to use XML Schema for ebXML definitions now. I was just pointing out that the tools are in the process of being developed (and initial implementations are available). Also, XML Schema is a lot easier to process (besides being richer) than DTD because it's XML itself, so you can leverage your existing tools for parsing and processing XML.

Rob