My Secret Life as a Spaghetti Coder
home | about | contact | privacy statement
I ran into a couple of stumbling blocks today using a particular company's XML request API, and it made me wonder about the restrictions we put in our software that have no apparent reason.

My plan was simple: create a struct/hash/associative array that matches the structure of the XML document, run it through a 10-line or so function that translates that to XML, and send the data to the service provider. Simple enough - my code doesn't even need to know the structure - the programmer using it would provide that, and the service provider doubles as the validator! My code was almost the perfect code. It did almost nothing, and certainly nothing more than it was meant or needed to do.

But alas, it was not meant to be. Instead, the service provider has a couple of restrictions:

The first was regarding case (as in upper/lower). The XML elements needed to have the same case as described in the documentation (which contained at least one element that wasn't in the real specification anyway). That's fine - I can live with that. But it annoyed me a little that they saw fit to use camelCase. (this is only a machine, after all. I don't think it cares if it can easily read the differentWordsAllBunchedUpTogether.)

At least if they had chosen all upper or all lower I can easily switch the case of my own, but requiring camelCase made my code quite a bit nastier than it needed to be. Now, I have to provide a lookup mechanism for each element in the XML. Of course, if the language I was using was case sensitive, this wouldn't be a big deal at all. However, even though it is not sensitive to case, this is still not that bad of an issue.

But then restriction number two comes along: all elements must be sent in the order they appear in the specification. We're just passing data around here. The XML describes the data in the first place, so what use is ordering it? I understand that parent/child relationships must remain intact, but I cannot see how there could possibly be a good reason that the "firstName" element should come before the "lastName" element. (Can you? I'd love to know!) Why don't we just go to a flat file and forget about the angled brackets altogether?

I might as well have just hard-coded the XML and had a variable for every element/attribute!

Hey! Why don't you make your life easier and subscribe to the full post or short blurb RSS feed? I'm so confident you'll love my smelly pasta plate wisdom that I'm offering a no-strings-attached, lifetime money back guarantee!


Comments
Leave a comment

Sounds like you might be working with the new Authorize.net recurring billing API? Their requirement that the elements be in a specific order (which maybe I missed, but didn't see in the docs) threw me for a quite a while.

Posted by Ryan Stille on Aug 05, 2007 at 11:20 PM UTC - 5 hrs

I won't tell, but you are quite perceptive! =)

Posted by Sam on Aug 06, 2007 at 10:40 AM UTC - 5 hrs

Leave a comment

Leave this field empty
Your Name
Email (not displayed, more info?)
Website

Comment:

Subcribe to this comment thread
Remember my details
Google
Web CodeOdor.com

Me
Picture of me

Topics
.NET (19)
AI/Machine Learning (14)
Answers To 100 Interview Questions (10)
Bioinformatics (2)
Business (1)
C and C++ (6)
cfrails (22)
ColdFusion (78)
Customer Relations (15)
Databases (3)
DRY (18)
DSLs (11)
Future Tech (5)
Games (5)
Groovy/Grails (8)
Hardware (1)
IDEs (9)
Java (38)
JavaScript (4)
Linux (2)
Lisp (1)
Mac OS (4)
Management (15)
MediaServerX (1)
Miscellany (76)
OOAD (37)
Productivity (11)
Programming (168)
Programming Quotables (9)
Rails (31)
Ruby (67)
Save Your Job (58)
scriptaGulous (4)
Software Development Process (23)
TDD (41)
TDDing xorblog (6)
Tools (5)
Web Development (8)
Windows (1)
With (1)
YAGNI (10)

Resources
Agile Manifesto & Principles
Principles Of OOD
ColdFusion
CFUnit
Ruby
Ruby on Rails
JUnit



RSS 2.0: Full Post | Short Blurb
Subscribe by email:

Delivered by FeedBurner