Reputation: 7466
Is there a semantically difference in the terms
in means of binding an object model to another representation, for instance XML. Does one include only the one-way mapping or are both terms synonyms?
Use case
I have a Java object model and want to create a XML representation of it. For this I use reflection. Since I am not interested to generate Java code from the XML this is only a one-way procedure.
Upvotes: 3
Views: 4349
Reputation: 24177
As far as I understand these terms binding and mapping are not exactly equivalent.
This implies binding is one way, while mapping usually works both ways.
For the proposed use case I would use mapping, as creating the XML file should work for any data.
When speaking of binding an object model to some representation, it implies the target representation is some kind of data (a class in some programming language is an instance of the model, chosen between many possible ones). That is, you won't perform a binding of the XML structure to an (abstract) object model, but you will map it to some other implementation.
Not sure I'm clear enough, but I use binding between class and instance (I bind an instance to some existing class) and I map two data structures, or one data-set to another (two objects of the same abstraction level).
Upvotes: 4