Talk:Plain Old XML

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Plain Old XML article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

some pecularities

Could these be explained? patsw 13:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing I'd like explained is this: "many POX users eschew XML Schema to avoid the poor or inconsistent quality of XML Schema-to-Java tools". It sounds like a non sequitur. Why can't they use XML schema, but not the Schema-to-Java tools? Mcswell (talk) 05:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because you lose the most obvious benefit of XML Schemas when you do that: automatic generation and verification of data that conforms to the schema. Spending a lot of time crafting a schema that exactly captures the data and its constraints is only worth it if you have strong guarantees that it will actually be used.

This problem is by no means specific to Java; the .NET tools are no picknick either. Many of the more complicated schema options are poorly supported or not at all, requiring manual intervention to produce compliant endpoints. 212.178.108.2 (talk) 10:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POX - Schema

It's not too evident in the article what's so interesting about POXs relation to XML Schema. 194.157.147.48 15:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RDF - XML

RDF has nothing to do with "multilayered XML". You have several syntax for RDF, like RDF/XML, but others exist as well like N3. -- 194.242.114.97 06:40, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POX vs REST

"REST could be seen as POX over HTTP with some peculiarities."

REST can use other data formats than XML and doesn't necessarily have to be based on HTTP. --87.165.56.234 20:06, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]