Object <-> XML Mapping 
Author Message
 Object <-> XML Mapping

The VW future release page says that VW 5i.4 will have an 'Object <-> XML
Mapping':
< http://www.*-*-*.com/
nt=futurerelease>

Could anyone comment on what this is? Is it in the beta? If so, where do we
get the beta?

This sounds like something really interesting, which many VW developers have
probably considered doing. The only thing that's stopped me so far is that I
don't have the time or energy to devote to making any mapping I come up with
into a standard. If Cincom makes one, it's a de facto standard and we can
all comment and help improve it.

Thanks,
Steve
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Steven Kelly, Product Development Manager           www.metacase.com
MetaCase Consulting, Ylistonmaentie 31, FIN-40500 Jyvaskyla, Finland



Mon, 19 Jan 2004 21:00:49 GMT  
 Object <-> XML Mapping
The dangerous thing about playing with XML in VW is so much of VW's code is
stored in XML that adding/modifying any of the functionality can break your
image.  Sure, it will still run, but suddenly source code starts looking
wierd.  Even if you think you have it working for what you're working on, the
source system can break.

I don't know what advantage VW gained from stroing source in XML.  It offers
no advantages over chunk format, and the later must be supported anyway.  By
tying source and XML together they have effectively guaranteed no significant
enhancements will be made to the XML library--it's simply too dangerous.

--
.tom



Tue, 20 Jan 2004 00:04:47 GMT  
 Object <-> XML Mapping

Quote:

> The dangerous thing about playing with XML in VW is so much of VW's code is
> stored in XML that adding/modifying any of the functionality can break your
> image.  Sure, it will still run, but suddenly source code starts looking
> wierd.  Even if you think you have it working for what you're working on, the
> source system can break.

> I don't know what advantage VW gained from stroing source in XML.  It offers
> no advantages over chunk format, and the later must be supported anyway.  By
> tying source and XML together they have effectively guaranteed no significant
> enhancements will be made to the XML library--it's simply too dangerous.

Oh come on.  There are plenty of ways to change the XML stuff without
affecting source code.  The standard way is to hack in subclasses and
then refactor when things work.  Yes it takes a little care but its far
from intractable.

But 5i supports a much more attractive alternative.  Duplicate the XML
framework in another Namespace (say TGXML) and hack on that.  Then you'd
be completely insulated.  Namespaces are useful things, no?

XML has *lots* of advantages over chunk format; it can store extra meta
information (namespace, author, modification date, etc, etc, etc)
without needing to modify the parser.  Its much easier to add new kinds
of change event, since without XML the change event parser has to
recognize a message form as representing a particular event, which
breaks down badly when one wants to change these forms.

We changed source to XML because the chunk format would no longer hack
it; things were getting increasingly difficult to represent in it.  XML
has freed us form these limitations.

--
_______________,,,^..^,,,____________________________
Eliot Miranda              Smalltalk - Scene not herd



Wed, 21 Jan 2004 04:07:05 GMT  
 Object <-> XML Mapping
It didn't make the beta release itself, but it will be included with the final 5i.4 release as a beta product. Beta because it just
didn't get enough polishing, testing and documentation in time for the release.

Regards,
Martin

Quote:

> The VW future release page says that VW 5i.4 will have an 'Object <-> XML
> Mapping':
> <http://www.cincom.com/scripts/smalltalk.exe/prodinformation/index.asp...
> nt=futurerelease>

> Could anyone comment on what this is? Is it in the beta? If so, where do we
> get the beta?

> This sounds like something really interesting, which many VW developers have
> probably considered doing. The only thing that's stopped me so far is that I
> don't have the time or energy to devote to making any mapping I come up with
> into a standard. If Cincom makes one, it's a de facto standard and we can
> all comment and help improve it.

> Thanks,
> Steve
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Steven Kelly, Product Development Manager           www.metacase.com
> MetaCase Consulting, Ylistonmaentie 31, FIN-40500 Jyvaskyla, Finland



Thu, 22 Jan 2004 13:10:15 GMT  
 Object <-> XML Mapping

Quote:

> <snip>

> Oh come on.  There are plenty of ways to change the XML stuff without
> affecting source code.  The standard way is to hack in subclasses and
> then refactor when things work.  Yes it takes a little care but its far
> from intractable.

> But 5i supports a much more attractive alternative.  Duplicate the XML
> framework in another Namespace (say TGXML) and hack on that.  Then you'd
> be completely insulated.  Namespaces are useful things, no?

Good idea!  I've always liked that about you, Eliot.  I think that's a good
project for next week (or maybe the week after that).

I promise to stop suggesting source-code in XML was a bad idea.

Quote:
> <snip>

--
.tom


Sat, 24 Jan 2004 00:15:15 GMT  
 
 [ 5 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. ><><><><>Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeelp on INT 14!><><><><><>

2. <<<<<YOU MUST CHECK THIS OUT >>>>>>>>>> 2103

3. Object <-> Relational Mapping (TopLink)

4. Object <-> Relational mapping

5. <><><> FLOODFILL <><><>

6. >>>HELP, DECOMPILER<<<

7. <<<XXX Password>>>

8. <<<XXX Password>>>

9. ??? <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< RGB 4 MMX >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>?

10. <<<XXX Password>>>

11. ??? <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< RGB 4 MMX >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>?

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software