Re:String types are fine. How about your code?
by zamalek on Thursday November 28, 2013 @08:55AM
(#6814473)
Find a different XML parser or adopt a different way of reading the XML (DOM vs. SAX; or just a different library that performs better). I see where you are coming from though. The problem with XML is that it is used to solve problems that it shouldn't be solving - it's a great technology when used correctly (XMPP is a great example of how XML can make other transfer formats look like a dress rehearsal). In most cases, as you said, "global design flaw" - a good indicator that you are abusing XML is if you are not using xmlns attributes and if you do not have multiple namespace (because in that case JSON is simpler, faster and makes more sense).
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:String types are fine. How about your code?
by lmm on Thursday November 28, 2013 @09:09AM
(#6814538)
What's the advantage of XMPP? I find the one time when I don't hate xml is when it doesn't have namespaces or schemata, as then it's just a slightly more verbose JSON.
Re:String types are fine. How about your code?
by zamalek on Thursday November 28, 2013 @11:41AM
(#6815233)
Not much is that special in terms of the XEPs (extension protocols) that they have defined. When you innovate with it though, man you really see the power of correct XML.
You can slap custom elements pretty much anywhere you want, as long as you have your own namespace (and it's recommended you only place them under <message> or <iq> elements). Say you have some proprietary technology in a client application, with XMPP you can throw an element under the <message> that your client can recognise and act on. For everyone else provide a hyperlink within the <body> element and serve up a web page for them. If they are using your client "bam!" instant added functionality - but if they are on device X which you do not support they are not left out in the cold.