• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: XML as generic villain
• From: David Megginson <david@m...>
• Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:05:55 -0500
• In-reply-to: <3E25A74B.2070508@t...>
• References: <a05200f01ba4b0b5b01ee@[192.168.123.136]><3E25A74B.2070508@t...>

Tim Bray writes:

 > Personally I couldn't see it, but I've been wrong lots of times, I also 
 > thought Ethernet was a joke when I first saw it :(  -Tim

What do you think about Ethernet today?

I've also seen many plans for using XML with hardware, mainly for
network-hardware configuration.  In principle, that sounds reasonable;
however, the projects quickly get mired in peripheral details like
schema processing, XSLT, or XMI, and thus are doomed from the start.

I've often written consultant's reports advising customers to start
with something simpler; I don't think I've ever advised anyone to make
a project more complicated.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson, david@m..., http://www.megginson.com/

• References:
  • XML as generic villain
    • From: Rex Brooks <rexb@s...>
  • Re: XML as generic villain
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML as generic villain
• Next by Date: Re: namespace URI references
• Previous by thread: Re: XML as generic villain
• Next by thread: Re: XML as generic villain
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread