Re: [ubl-ndrsc] XML and Polymorphism

["Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@sun.com>]

Sorry to have sounded accusatory!  I didn't mean it that way.  But I do 
think you'll find that presenting the concept under this banner will 
confuse a lot of ordinary programmers...  Most programming languages 
don't offer true polymorphism because it's very hard.  Java sort of has 
it, but cheats by making you do all the work of mapping to multiple 
classes (with interfaces).

	Eve

A Gregory wrote:
> Eve:
> 
> In my experience, the term "polymorphism" is actually used this way pretty
> often among the tiny community of those who care ;-)
> 
> The way Matt Fuch intended it was that, because an element could be
> identified to the processor with many different names (all of the names of
> its ancestors) it was 'polymorphic'. It makes sense if you think about Java
> binding the way Matt Fuchs does, although it is certainly not immediately
> obvious how it is intended. Matt has presented on this subject to the OMG
> and in some other places, though, so don't blame me and eDuardo(!)
> 
> Matt:
> 
> Matthew Fuchs gave a presentation at the last XML 2002 conference
> (Baltimore), so his contact info should be in the proceedings. He's working
> for a company that does something with security, if I remember right. I
> don't have my copy of the proceedings, but somebody should, and I can look
> up his contact info when I get home (next week) if you don't find it before
> then.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Arofan
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Eve Maler                                        +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems                            cell +1 781 354 9441
Web Technologies and Standards               eve.maler @ sun.com