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

Re: Painful USA Today article (was RE: ANN: RESTTuto

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Painful USA Today article (was RE: ANN: RESTTutorial)
• From: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>
• Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 01:20:05 -0700
• References: <4F4182C71C1FDD4BA0937A7EB7B8B4C105534FD6@r...>

Joshua Allen wrote:
> But if an RFP says that you need
> to use XML in the foreigner-tracking database, then that's what you have
> to do.

No, you don't. You can refuse the contract (which I believe Len says he
sometimes does) or beat the customer over the head until they understand
why feature X is a bad idea. Refusing to do nonsensical things won't
make you richer, but does lead to better software (communities, schools,
whatever). I'm well aware that this is a pretty idealistic viewpoint,
but it's always served me (and those I work for) quite well.

> There are still DOD RFPs that specify that you must code the solution in
> Ada.

And we wonder where our tax dollars went...

-- Ron

• References:
  • RE: Painful USA Today article (was RE: ANN: RESTTutorial)
    • From: "Joshua Allen" <joshuaa@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Painful USA Today article (was RE: ANN: RESTTutorial)
• Next by Date: RE: Painful USA Today article (was RE: ANN: R ESTTutorial)
• Previous by thread: RE: Painful USA Today article (was RE: ANN: RESTTutorial)
• Next by thread: RE: Painful USA Today article (was RE: ANN: RESTTutorial)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread