[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: The relentless march of abstraction (fwd)

• From: Dave Winer <dave@u...>
• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 07:50:36 -0800

Huh? I think there's a disconnect here Claude.

I don't get how this message is responsive to mine. In fact I agree with a
lot of what you say.

However.. For whatever reason (outside of my control) users find browsers
friendly, and ignore their flaws, and are scared of non-HTML interfaces.
This is what's going on in 2001. Last fall we tried doing it all in an
outliner, and it appealed to people who like and understand outliners, but
that's a very small group of people. When we switched over to rendering in
HTML people got excited. Go figure. I wish it were otherwise.

Dave


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
To: <xml-dev@l...>
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 7:26 AM
Subject: RE: The relentless march of abstraction (fwd)


> As if HTML were the only rendering language
> and web browsers were the only clients....
>
> Assertion:  Client-side XML depends on the
> services of a robust XML processor to do
> heavy lifting chores.   Server side does too.
> The problem is designing messages that
> work well for multiple configurations of
> common processes.
>
> 1.  How many chores does it do before
> it becomes one mother-fat library object
> itself in bad need of modularization?
>
> 2.  Do the inconsistent data models
> of the various chore handlers make
> the noisiness of the result unendurable?
>
> Bits on the wire WON'T do it.  That way
> lies endless consulting costs and increasing
> coupling to vendor-specific idiosyncracies.  We see
> it every day here where different parsers
> and different handlers are making a nightmare
> of network messaging apps such that we have
> to tell our partners *XML.DLL version zed*
> or nothing, or we have to build all the
> components and frankly, why bother with
> XML if we have to do that.
>
> This is real world stuff from real programmers
> doing real work and all very hosed that XML
> technology is not living up to the promise
> of blind interoperability based on the spec.
>
> So, kindly get down to that and ignore the
> relentless FUD.  The march is relentless because
> it is trying to go somewhere.  We'd like to
> know a little bit more about the destination.
> IOW, how many sets of PSVI properties have
> to be handled and how soon will that be
> defined much less implemented?
>
> Y'all shot the grove guys down and claimed
> you knew more and could do a better job.
> Our feet are waiting to vote.
>
> Len
> http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard
>
> Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
> Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Winer [mailto:dave@u...]
>
> I agree with Don and Tim here.
>
> Especially if there's a server on the user's machine, reading XML feeds,
> doing a lot of churning, and generating HTML that any 4.0-level browser
can
> render.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org, an initiative of OASIS
> <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> "unsubscribe" in the body to: xml-dev-request@l...

• References:
  • RE: The relentless march of abstraction (fwd)
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: SAX-ext Attribute + Entity Parsing
• Next by Date: RE: Why 90 percent of XML standards will fail
• Previous by thread: RE: The relentless march of abstraction (fwd)
• Next by thread: RE: The relentless march of abstraction (fwd)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread