• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Web Design Principles (was Re: Generality ofHTTP)
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 02:10:19 -0500
• In-reply-to: <GCE0ZTWUIDSRXSM2UPLKEVVQXUMI32.3c5642b8@MChamp>
• Organization: Red Bridge Interactive, Inc.
• References: <GCE0ZTWUIDSRXSM2UPLKEVVQXUMI32.3c5642b8@MChamp>

On Tuesday 29 January 2002 01:35 am, Mike Champion wrote:
> Perhaps this gets at the idea:  The "conventional" data processing
> and document processing approach treats XML as simply a standardized
> input and output format for objects and programs. SOAP was clearly
> designed primarily as a neutral wire format for serialized object
> exchange, and the  W3C XML Schema spec seems driven more by the
> needs of RDBMS vendors to exchange SQL data.

When the XML activity was chartered, it was chartered as an alternative to HTML to improve the life of *people*. There are lot's of cases where people can leverage the markup in interesting ways.
As an example, I've seen a number of examples of ad-hoc knowledge bases being built around very simple tagging... people added tags as they added knowledge as it were. A very effective use of the technology. 

I've recently begun to feel that we've lost focus on the document (things that people work with) side of XML. I think (hope?) Simon feels the same way. 

• References:
  • Re: Web Design Principles (was Re: GeneralityofHTTP)
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Web Design Principles (was Re: Generality ofHTTP)
• Next by Date: Re: Web Design Principles (was Re: Generality ofHTTP)
• Previous by thread: Re: Web Design Principles (was Re: GeneralityofHTTP)
• Next by thread: middle paths (was Re: Web Design Principles)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread