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

RE: XDocs and XForms?

• To: 'Ann Navarro' <ann@w...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: XDocs and XForms?
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 13:37:20 -0500

It is realistic, Ann.  Some developers are 
using specs and standards, others are developing their 
own codes for the requirements they have at 
hand.  Some wouldn't use XML at all except 
Microsoft made the decision for them and the 
libraries make that the path of least 
resistance.  SVG would likely be a "nice but 
maybe later" had Adobe not implemented it. 
Some see the sense of SVG but don't comply.

I watched a demo recently in which 
the developer wasn't concerned that he could 
not put arbitrary tags in and call it SVG. 
No namespaces; just new tags because he 
was implementing his own player.  I asked 
if he considered that the right thing to do; 
he said, "It's XML isn't it?  I thought 
extensibility was it's reason to be." 
I don't think he means to abuse the 
standard; he thinks he is using one.

Some would rather use delimited ASCII 
and possibly should.  Others see a spec'd 
tag set and use it but with limited recognition 
of the implied semantics or even paying attention 
to the outer wrappers.  They stitch together 
what appears to them to be the "right" thing.

XDocs won't thrive on XForms compliance.  It 
will thrive if it is a good solution within 
the context of the Microsoft platform.  If 
y'all want to cite Metcalfe and count nodes, 
etc., count the number of installations of 
that platform on commercial desktops and then 
figure out who is paying attention.  Developers 
are.  It might be a good design.  Maybe it 
should become a standard.  We'll have to wait 
and see.  Jean Paoli's name is on the XML 
spec; do you think he does not understand 
the value of standards?

But so many of you will wilt in the sun before 
you will concede that MS can do this as well 
as you can, I would not blame them for saying, 
"we won't bother; we'll just sell running code".
I look at the HTC design and say, "Dang, that 
works.  What is the problem?"  And the 
only conclusion I can come to is, "NIH".  

Where is the sense in that, Ann?

Still, XML enables all of that.   It is not right 
or wrong.  It is individual choice.  Anyone 
who didn't see it coming wasn't paying attention.
Standards and specs have roles to play, but they 
must win and earn the right to keep them 

.... just like the rest of the running code.  

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Ann Navarro [mailto:ann@w...]

At 12:27 PM 10/16/2002 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

>You may be creating standards.  Standards creation
>is always a *hopeful* activity.   Others are
>simply coming up with a tag set for their
>software, maybe a few others, to consume.

I think that's a little pessimistic.

I won't argue that this doesn't occur, but I would argue that just as often 
there are developers that truly want to do the 'right thing' by standards. 
As a consultant, it's a question I get often -- How can we be compliant 
(and still do what we need to do)?

• Prev by Date: Re: Java String to Doc
• Next by Date: Re: The XML 1.1 Candidate Recommendation is published
• Previous by thread: Re: XDocs and XForms?
• Next by thread: RE: XDocs and XForms?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread