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

RE: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1

• To: "'Eric van der Vlist'" <vdv@d...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
• From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>
• Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 11:06:41 +0100
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <1035183691.17193.1602.camel@ibook>
• Reply-to: <michael.h.kay@n...>

> Thinking about XML 1.1, I am wondering what will be the 
> perceived cost/benefit ratio and if XML 1.1 will not have the 
> XHTML syndrom. 
> 
...
> 
> I am an unicode illetrate and I am probably missing a lot of 
> important reasons why I need XML 1.1 without knowing it :-) 
> but my feeling is that if those reasons are not more clearly 
> advertised than "IBM mainframes need it" or "it's the right 
> way to use unicode", the adoption rate of XML 1.1 could be very low.
> 

I think you're absolutely right: the new features in XML 1.1 and
Namespaces 1.1 are of very marginal value compared to the costs created
by the discontinuity, for vendors and users alike.

A lot depends on the major parsers, though. If they decide their users
aren't interested in XML 1.1 so they're not going to rush to implement
it, then obviously XML 1.1 is dead. If they decide they're going to
implement it whether users want it or not, then people will gradually
adopt it without really noticing they have done so.

Michael Kay
Software AG
home: Michael.H.Kay@n...
work: Michael.Kay@s... 

• References:
  • Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wa rs!
• Next by Date: RE: Java package for XPath 1.0
• Previous by thread: Re: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
• Next by thread: Re: Perceived C/B for XML 1.1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread