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

Bad Business (was Re: advocating XML)

• From: David Megginson <david@m...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 08:19:40 -0500

This is a strange thread -- I'll admit to not having read every
posting, but why *should* anyone want to go out and advocate XML where
it might not be needed?

If comma-delimited does everything someone wants, then it makes sense
to stick with it.  If the person later wants to do stuff that
comma-delimited makes too hard (nested/recursive structures, optional
and repeatable fields, partly self-describing format, structural
validation, markup mixed into a text stream, etc.) then, and only
then, does it make sense to come and talk with us, the XML community.

There's no point anticipating those problems -- a competent manager
should wait until they actually come up.  Paying the high cost of a
transition to XML (or any other shiny new technology) early and up
front when it might never be needed is bad business.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson                 david@m...
           http://www.megginson.com/

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Bad Business (was Re: advocating XML)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • RE: advocating XML
    • From: Danny Ayers <danny@p...>
  • Re: advocating XML
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: SyncML is kind of interesting
• Next by Date: Re: advocating XML
• Previous by thread: Re: advocating XML
• Next by thread: Re: Bad Business (was Re: advocating XML)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread