And yes, you are right about me being un-familiar with all of the details of xml :) But... nothing to do about that except put my head down and work with it more.
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 1:28 PM, John Thompson <jthompson...@gmail.com>wrote: > I probably should have worded things differently. Much of my experience > has been in the automotive arena, where I have seen a lot of "non-standard" > things done, and where I have seen a lot of code almost purposely written > to make that person "indispensable" (either that or they were just a kid in > the nursery banging on the round hole until the square peg finally went > through). > And getting them to change that when you are the small guy, and, they are > the big guy is not reality. > > Not that I consider myself above everyone else in that industry (because I > have met a lot of intelligent folks too)- I have just seen a lot of > code/systems that could have been done better, if patience and some thought > had went into it. (This is including working with xml feeds in the > automotive industry). > > So at any rate... > > In short: > > If I were to compare for example, php's simple xml "tools" with U2 xml > "tools", I would consider the php tool more flexible, and easier to learn. > (perhaps "tools" is a wrong term to use...) > > http://php.net/manual/en/book.simplexml.php > > That statement would agree with your statement of using tools outside of > MV. > > That being said, everyone has tools they like, and some companies mandate > you use certain tools within a department, etc. > > So if you have to use U2 xml tools, then by all means. BUT, if you can > find another tool (or build one yourself), that is more flexible, easier > for others to understand, and gets the job done in a way where its also > maintainable by others (i.e. not jamming that square peg in there), then do > that. > > And at this point, Mark (the original poster) has probably stopped paying > attention which is totally my fault. I apologize. > > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Tony Gravagno > <3xk547...@sneakemail.com>wrote: > >> From: John Thompson >> > This is where I think languages like php get it right. >> > Their simple XML stuff makes it simple to parse even >> > the junk you may get from somewhere else. >> >> I've commented here and blogged on this topic a number of times. >> I shake my head at the pain people continually subject themselves >> to when trying to force the square peg of XML into the round hole >> of Pick BASIC just because that's the comfort zone. There are >> any number of other tools out there specifically designed to work >> with XML. If you go to many other forums, developers aren't >> focused on the XML processing. They deftly convert to/from XML >> (and JSON) without a problem, and their questions are largely >> focused on what to do with the data. MV professionals need to >> shift focus from doing everything within the MVDBMS to making the >> best use of all tools available and integrating the MVDBMS with >> whatever utility does the job that's required. At the core of >> it, even when using external tools we convert XML to "something" >> and that "something" ultimately needs to be saved in an MV >> structure. (Similarly for outbound XML.) But if you're focused >> on namespaces and attributes then the tools you're using aren't >> providing adequate abstraction from the XML, and you might want >> to consider tools that convert XML to "something else" which is >> easier for you to use. >> >> >> > The reality is, that there are a lot of sites and >> > places out there that will send you all kinds of xml, >> > and I found that since I was not proficient at >> > "massaging" those "non-standard" feeds into what the >> > U2 xml tools wanted, I just found it easier to do it >> > another way. >> >> Whoe - stop right there. I tend to angle away from DBMS-oriented >> tools for processing XML, but in all fairness we can't expect any >> tool to behave properly if the data doesn't conform to standards. >> No, I haven't seen "a lot of sites" sending "all kinds of XML" >> that is "non-standard". If you have a trading partner that >> doesn't produce or consume industry-standard documents, you need >> to talk with their IT people, and escallate to management on both >> sides if you're not getting cooperation. >> >> Respectfully, I'm guessing you're just not familiar with some of >> the details of XML, and when the U2 tools don't seem to address >> one of those details I'm guessing you're considering the document >> to be non-standard rather than the U2 tools. Again, in all >> fairness to the U2 team, I'm guessing this is a documentation >> issue or some lack of understanding along the way rather than any >> entity being non-standard. If indeed the U2 tools aren't >> providing standard functionality, well, see paragraph 1 above. >> :) >> >> Good luck. >> >> Tony Gravagno >> Nebula Research and Development >> TG@ remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com >> Nebula R&D sells mv.NET and other Pick/MultiValue products >> worldwide, and provides related development services >> remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com/blog >> Visit http://PickWiki.com! Contribute! >> http://Twitter.com/TonyGravagno >> NEW! http://groups.google.com/group/mvdbms/about >> >> _______________________________________________ >> U2-Users mailing list >> U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org >> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users >> > > > > -- > John Thompson > -- John Thompson _______________________________________________ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
