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

RE: RE: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"

  • To: 'Mike Champion' <mc@x...>, xml-dev@l...
  • Subject: RE: RE: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"
  • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 10:04:03 -0600

risc patents
From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@x...]

3/18/2002 10:14:02 AM, "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...> wrote:

>>Do the other as well.   Based on those, 
>>the Semantic Web, DAML, OIL, and maybe 
>>RDF are headed for the heap too.

>Ahem ... you said it, not me. Time will tell ...

Playing the game by the rules you set, that would 
be the prediction.  And no, having to say the 
politically incorrect thing bothers me not at 
all.  That's the American Way, and candor to 
one's team and one's superiors is at the heart 
of good communications.  That is the "simple is better" 
rule in life.  Complicated explanations are for 
university professors and doctoral theses. ;-)

<ot>Part of making the SW succeed will depend 
on simplicity in natural language.  One reason 
many of us went to markup was to deal with that 
problem.</ot>

>I would say that the apparent victory of Google 
>over metadata is another win for the 80/20 rule.

Love Google.  Don't want it as a business interface.

>It will be interesting to see if the intrinsic 
>complexity of human language raises the bar high enough
>so that some semantic web technology is actually
>simpler to work with than a brute force technology 
>at some point.  

It depends on what functionality one wants to automate. 
It may be the case that some of the projected uses 
of the seemantic web aren't as desirable as others.


>RISC succeeded and quietly was absorbed into 
>the Intel monopoly.   Once a monopoly exists, 
>its leadership is the predictor of success for technologies 
>that follow.   MS support was the main factor 
>in the success of XML.   All other factors pale 
>by comparison.

>Thanks to those who educated me on RISC.  So,
>did XML and RISC succeed because monopolists decided
>to support them ... or did the monopolists decide that
>being on the right side of the 80/20 point was the 
>best way to maintain their edge?  

I was there for that decision.   It predates the monopolies. 
RISC was adopted because it was fast.   RISC patents aren't 
all held by Intel although they broadly and illegally 
use them.

>Say what one will about
>the Duopoly's business practices, they both act as if
>there is competition when it comes to technology ...
>because, in the long run, there always is.

True statement.

>Likewise SOAP and REST ... if REST really nails the
>80/20 point, I expect it to be quietly subsumed by
>the "web services" vision and products of the big companies.

REST support is already there.  Tool support for choosing 
the architecture is at issue.

len


PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.