On 11/11/2011 11:50 PM, Thomas Beale wrote: > "occurrences": "1..*" > well that's my opinion as well, and XML-ers always react badly! The > 'proper' parser code for dealing with this form, used in the ADL parser > is (from the .y file): > Well I consider myself an XML-er and I don't see massive problems with it, but maybe I have become soft in my old age.
My main argument would be that the XML at one point was almost a straight serialization of the object model, as supported by various XML data binding libraries. So XML -> AOM memory objects -> XML was all doable with very standard binding libraries. BUT I was happy with status quo because I don't really care about the size of the XML or how often elements are repeated or the fact that is looks ugly to people - if people want compressed data then they should use fastinfoset or exi, and then gzip and it'll compress beautifully. The size/format/look is a concern to others. BUT If I have lost the battle and if we are going to do customised XML serializations then once you've taken it outside the normal data binding by introducing "*" forms or even 'properties' that aren't really properties but kind of quasi computed fields then you mind as well as give up on the pretence that the XML serialization will bind straight into an AOM compatible object model.. in which case parsing "1..*" is not a problem Andrew
