|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Why I Like Longhorn and XAML
clbullar@i... (Bullard, Claude L (Len)) writes: >Wait a minute. They also enable us to serialize objects >we control. That is what extensible means. That they do >it with CLR implemented languages only makes sense from >their perspective. Better than the HTML straitjacket >and waiting for results to come from committees controlled >elsewhere with agendas that may not have anything to do with >the businesses we are in. Uh, Len? It's very generous that they let you serialize your own objects in XML, but, well, you can already do that. You've been able to do that since roughly 1998. I don't think that remotely gets them off the hook for reinventing huge amounts of work in their own proprietary image. I'm not fond of committees either, but I'll take them over vendors any day. Not that the W3C is perfect, but it's slightly less controlling than Microsoft, and does listen once in a while to people on grounds of tech, not just dollars. Treating XML as an object serialization format tends to produce garbage XML anyway, but if Microsoft wants to sell it as a great advance, that is sadly their prerogative. They've certainly got the marketing budget. Microsoft has never had too many qualms about poisoning tech practice when they felt their own investments were at stake. They're not renowned for their interest in the tech ecosystem. This kind of regular trashing of the ecosystem is the best reason I can see to get out of tech entirely. I'm not willing to be a thrall to this kind of nonsense, and arguing with thralls and their keepers is apparently a waste of time.
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||

Cart








