[XML-SIG] WDDX for Python

[Paul Prescod]

Simeon Simeonov wrote:
> 
> Yup, this is probably the easiest way to go about providing some basic
> object serialization. I don't have a problem with this.

Great!

> I agree with you here. Do you have a particular URI type (look'n'feel) in
> mind?

There are three conventions that should be followed:

 * SGML convention is that the URI should be to a document describing the
object type. That way if you ever "find" a packet, (e.g. as a
serialization of a large data structure) then you can research it.

 * XML Namespaces convention is that applications should not depend on any
particular type of data at the other end (or of the URI pointing to
anything at all)

 * general URL convention is that you or your organization should own the
domain name.

> >Also, what if we added an optional "id" attribute and a <REFERENCE>
> >type...(maybe I can wait on the reference type for WDDX 2, but I'd rather
> >not)
> 
> This is a much nastier problem as it complicates and slows down both the
> serialization and deserialization algorithms. Not that it's a difficult
> thing to implement, but it does require the maintenance of data global to
> the entire serialization/deserialization process and it slows the process
> down considerably. We should probably handle this by optionally notifying
> the serializer/deserializer that they are dealing with aggregate data and no
> references.

I admit that this increases the complexity alot. The biggest problem is
dealing with mutually recursive references between objects: especially in
strongly typed programming languages. In dynamically typed languages you
can easily build proxies for the object that isn't available yet. In a
static language I don't know offhand what you would do.

 Paul Prescod  - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for only himself
 http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco

"Sports utility vehicles are gated communities on wheels" - Anon