On Sun, Apr 28, 2002 at 10:54:43AM +0300, Juha-P Lindfors wrote:
> And here I was thinking the point of XML was to make it easier for
> the *machine* to parse structured data.
In which case, it would all be ASN.1.
> <jns:implements name="MyInterface"/>
> <jns:implements name="ThatOtherInterface"/>
Yeah, I'll bet it does.
Your example is actually the exception that proves the rule. Someone
who was literate in XML, but with no prior exposure to the syntax and
semantics of Java, could get more meaning out of the XML version than the
Java version.
And here's a good example of "bad DTD":
> <jns:invokestatic name="java.lang.System" reference="out">
> <jns:method name="println">
> <jns:value><![CDATA[Hello, World]]</jns:value>
> </jns:method>
> </jns:invokestatic>
Yes, if you have the resources to design and implement a specific language
for a specific application, that language will be more concise, and if the
users of the application have the time to study and practice that
language, to them it will be more readable.
XML allows one to minimise the number of data representation languages
in the world that must be designed, implemented, studied and practiced.
Which is the whole point of a lingua franca. In the 18th century, nobody
particularly enjoyed communicating in French; it was simply a preferable
alternative to having to learn all the other languages.
-Michael Robinson
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
