Apart from the size issue, readability is a particular problem because
of the verbosity of the current XML schema.

Ian

Dr Ian McNicoll
office +44 (0)1536 414 994
fax +44 (0)1536 516317
mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
skype ianmcnicoll
ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com

Clinical Modelling Consultant,?Ocean Informatics, UK
openEHR Clinical Knowledge Editor www.openehr.org/knowledge
Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL
BCS Primary Health Care ?www.phcsg.org




On 11 November 2011 13:56, Andrew Patterson <andrewpatto at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>


Reply via email to