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

RE: A Systematic Approach to using Simple XML Vocabularies to

• To: <david.lyon@c...>, "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>
• Subject: RE: A Systematic Approach to using Simple XML Vocabularies to Implement Large (Complex) Systems
• From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@b...>
• Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 22:55:53 -0500
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• Thread-index: AcTiS6M02vAqp1BzQs65TQZ/UrQMRQADiImw
• Thread-topic: A Systematic Approach to using Simple XML Vocabularies to Implement Large (Complex) Systems

> -----Original Message-----
> From: david.lyon@c... 
> [mailto:david.lyon@c...] 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 9:09 PM
> To: Roger L. Costello
> Cc: xml-dev@l...
> Subject: Re:  A Systematic Approach to using Simple 
> XML Vocabularies to Implement Large (Complex) Systems
> 
> 
> > Yesterday Len and Peter outlined two strategies.  I would like to 
> > flesh out their ideas. ....... Imagine that a large system 
> requires an 
> > Invoice XML vocabulary for a Book purchase.
> 
> > What do you (xml-dev'ers) think about all this?  Can you think of 
> > other approaches?  /Roger
> 
> Interesting application..
> 
> In a truly large scale system, like an industrial city, you 
> would have tens of thousands of open connections organised 
> into some sort grid arrangement.
> 
> What we tend to do now is insist on one connection per 
> machine at the client side and many connections at the server side.
> 
> It's purely historical.. been there many times. The manager 
> of the IT department says "We will have thousands of 
> connections (to our clients) - but they will only have one to us".
> 
> So everybody keeps writing what the boss of in the big 
> company wants.. not what is technically possible or what is 
> really needed.
> 
> There are tens of thousands of small/medium sized enterprises 
> that eagerly await software to break ranks and have this 
> multi-to-multi communication capability.
> 
> but reorganising the internet so that it can achieve it's 
> next degree of interoperation is something that can't be 
> controlled by governments or academic institutions.
> 
> I remember I suggested one time on this list that xml move to 
> version 2 and was told I couldn't contribute because I wasn't 
> in the W3C. Then surprise, xml moved to 1.1.

[JMC] That's because they were giving you more time to join before they
advanced the version to 2.0*.

*which they did not of course, just an attempt at a subtle joke

Kind Regards,
Joseph Chiusano
Booz Allen Hamilton
Strategy and Technology Consultants to the World
 
> Goes to show.. some ideas work because they are forced... 
> some work simply because it is their time.
> 
> DL - crackpots anonymous
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org 
> <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative of OASIS 
> <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> 
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
> 
> 

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: A Systematic Approach to using Simple XML Vocabularies to Implement Large (Complex) Systems
    • From: david.lyon@c...

• Prev by Date: Re: What niche is XQuery targeting?
• Next by Date: RE: A Systematic Approach to using Simple XML Vocabularies to Implement Large (Complex) Systems
• Previous by thread: w3c comes to australia
• Next by thread: RE: A Systematic Approach to using Simple XML Vocabularies to Implement Large (Complex) Systems
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread