Re: [Omaha.pm] database -> XML

["Rob Townley" <rob.townley@gmail.com>]

On 4/30/07, George Neill <georgen@neillnet.com> wrote:

Quoting Rob Townley <rob.townley@gmail.com>:

> Several years ago, elements were better.

There's no good answer, I believe it depends what you are trying to
do.  Elements are nice because they are extendible/readable ... but
lengthy at times.  Take a look at the link Jay provided, the author
makes good sense.

An example,

<records>
   <record>
     <id>0</id>
     <fields>
       <field>
         <name>lastname</name>
         <length>20</length>
       </field>
       <field>
         <name>city</name>
         <length>28</length>
       </field>
       <field>
         <name>zipcode</name>
         <length>5</length>
       </field>
     </fields>
   </record>
</records>

I find overkill.  But apparently the M$ tools ('code generators')
slurp the above xml without having to write a lick of code.  I would
prefer something in the middle.

<records>
   <record id="0">

     <field name="lastname">
       <length>20</length>
     </field>

     <field name="city">
       <length>28</length>
     </field>

     <field name="zipcode">
       <length>5</length>
     </field>

   </record>
</records>


Later,
George.

_______________________________________________
Omaha-pm mailing list
Omaha-pm@pm.org
http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/omaha-pm

Even though i argued for using XML in about everything, the verbosity of many of XML projects subconsciously drove me away from programming, in particular, the XML MS products would spew out.  However, judicious use of namespaces would help some.   i remember having  trouble with some of the  dtd's  when  using a namespace version of an xml doc, so i wasn't able to use namespaces back then as much as i would have liked.

<records using namespace or however a ns is declared.>
     <id>0
      <ns:fname>lastname</>
      <flength>20</>
      <fname>city</>
      <flength>28</>
      <fname>zipcode</>
      <flength>5</>
     </id>   
</records>