mirror of
git://git.psyc.eu/libpsyc
synced 2024-08-15 03:19:02 +00:00
reasoning why XML namespaces aren't better.. they're just very verbose
This commit is contained in:
parent
cf37c2bb00
commit
22a97266fb
1 changed files with 11 additions and 1 deletions
|
@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ instead it allows for more addressing schemes than just PSYC.
|
|||
|
||||
** A new status updated activity
|
||||
Example taken from http://onesocialweb.org/spec/1.0/osw-activities.html
|
||||
You could call this XML namespace hell:
|
||||
You could call this XML namespace hell.. :-)
|
||||
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/activity.xml src xml
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -122,6 +122,16 @@ We'll use the latter here:
|
|||
|
||||
#+INCLUDE: packets/activity.psyc src psyc
|
||||
|
||||
It's nice about XML namespaces how they can by definition never collide,
|
||||
but this degree of engineering perfection causes us a lot of overhead.
|
||||
The PSYC approach is to just extend the name of the method - as long as
|
||||
people use differing method names, protocol extensions can exist next
|
||||
to each other happily. Method name unicity cannot mathematically be ensured,
|
||||
but it's enough to append your company name to make it unlikely for anyone
|
||||
else on earth to have the same name. How this kind of safety is delivered
|
||||
when using the JSON syntax of ActivityStreams is unclear. Apparently it was
|
||||
no longer an important design criterion.
|
||||
|
||||
* Results
|
||||
|
||||
Parsing time of 1 000 000 packets, in milliseconds.
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue