Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Is XML getting too hard? (was: Re: More on Namespaces...)
 At 05:05 18/08/1998 , Sean Mc grath wrote: | >Simon St.Laurent writes: | > | > > Still, could somebody slow this stuff down so that XML can have a | > > tiny chance to grow? We're not even at the first round of browser | > > implementations and already it looks like XML is attempting | > > self-immolation at the shrine of complexity. The specs are doing | > > too many things in too many places. | > | [David Megginson] | >This is progress: it took SGML over a decade to get this complicated. | > | :=) | | I share Simon St. Laurents concern that namespaces, schemas etc. are | getting rather hairy. I think there is a possibility that the | sleek Dolphin that is XML might begin to morph into a Duck Billed | Platypus. | | XML came about in a remarkably short period of time and yet exhibits | substantial "beauty" in its simplicity. The reason for this goes deeper | than the fact that some great minds designed it -- XML is the result of | over a *decade* of experience with SGML. Some good things in SGML were | dropped, some good things were retained, but all the while, the decisions | were based on rubber-on-the-road *experience*. | | By contast, namespaces, schemas etc. are very, very new to SGML/XML. | There is no decade of directly relevant, collective wisdom on which | the great minds designing them can draw. I apologise in advance for the low information content of this message. It's just that I've been lurking on this list for a while now, while keeping busy implementing practical SGML solutions ... and I think I've reached the "straw that broke the camel's back". I think the whole XML/XSL/XML-Data/etc approach is reaching crisis time --- it's killing itself before it has even grown from infancy. I have just read the comments regarding the recently-released XSL spec, and frankly I am horrified by the use of another grammar that is not XML! This comes hard on the heels of the namespace spec, which has not been well received in a number of areas. Now I have been in the SGML field for a number of years, but frankly, I find many of the discussions on this list esoteric to say the least. I don't have time to read all of these increasingly-complex specs, and I'm in the field! So I ask: what happened to XML being simple? Or to put it another way: if I have to support namespaces, XSL, XML-Data (and more) in order to do anything, I'm going back to SGML --- it's simpler! For heaven's sake W3C, stop releasing specs. I vote for withdrawing all the latest specs, and placing them in a "for discussion" state. We can then get back to them when we have a year's experience under our belt. Instead, lets pour all our efforts into releasing XML-aware software. Make it a standard first before aiming for the moon ... Again, apologies for the rant. However, it's a worry when even propeller-heads in the SGML industry like me feel like they're falling behind ... Cheers, James ------------------------- James Robertson Step Two Designs Pty Ltd SGML, XML & HTML Consultancy http://www.steptwo.com.au/ jamesr@s... "Beyond the Idea" ACN 081 019 623 xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...) 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
