On 06/04/2013 01:22 PM, Pete Cordell wrote:
> Original Message From: "Andrew Welch"
>>
>> For example the dev is faced with the challenge of extracting the
>> <title> and product/@id values from some xml.
>>
>> They could:
>>
>> - use xquery/xpath
>> - use xom/jdom
>> - use sax/stax
>>
>> instead they use a tool to generate an xsd from the xml, then use a
>> binding tool to generate some classes, then use those generated
>> classes.
>
> If you just have sample XML files as your data model, which change
> rapidly, isn't there a risk that everybody has a different idea of what
> the data model is? At least with an XSD there is a definitive
> documented data structure.
I think the problem with the example as given is that the dev generates
a new XSD for each XML document that comes their way, because they don't
know enough about XML to apply a definitive documented data structure.
One of the tools I show in training is standalone lxprintf on the
command line. Just the fact that half a line of typing can extract what
most devs would write a C program for is a revelation.
///Peter
