Re: AW: AW: [PEAR-DEV] [RfC] XML_Serializer

On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Roman Neuhauser wrote: > # greg@chiaraquartet.net / 2003-07-29 14:55:12 -0400: > > Hi Stephan, > > > > Stephan Schmidt wrote: > > >>Without documentation of how and why this is any better than > > >>wddx_serialize_*(), I am -1. > > > > > >This is NOT better than WDDX, this is something totally different. > > >This class is not about data interchange, it's about creating XML files > > >from > > >PHP data structures. > > > > Your description above "creating XML files from PHP data structures" > > implies that Josh's suggestion on a name is better than XML_Serializer. > > If you use "serialize" in the name, all users will associate it with > > the serialization that they know, which is serialize and > > wddx_serialize_*. If you don't want this association, which you clearly > > don't by the capital "NOT" :), then the name makes no sense. You should > > call it XML_Data_Generator as Josh suggested, or XML_Data_Manager, since > > you are planning to add an unserialize. If you have the subclasses that > > you mention, people will understand what they do in the context of > > managing data. To imply that XML is not about data interchange doesn't > > make sense, that is its sole purpose. > > The truth is that the name Stephan chose is as correct as it can > get. I don't see any misleading potential in the name, even when > thinking of serialize() and the wddx_* functions. serialize() > marshalls PHP data into it's own format, wddx_serialize() into the > WDDX doctype, Stephan's class into into another (or even any) XML > doctype. I'll back that up. Converting data-structures into a XML-file/string is called serializing in every other application/framework/etc. There's nothing misleading about that part ;) chregu