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

RE: Goodbye XML-Deviant

• To: 'Robin Berjon' <robin.berjon@e...>
• Subject: RE: Goodbye XML-Deviant
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 13:08:45 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

Yep.  XML itself is boring.  It's plumbing.

But that's only the code side.  If one takes the position that 
the 'interesting' topics are about development/programming 
and all other issues are noise then yes, the list becomes 
irrelevant to a publication with different interests as 
the programming threads evolve into perma-threads because of 
the market cycle for XML products.  On the other hand,  XML, 
as a side effect of its ubiquity, becomes an attractor for 
many different topics of discussion.  Web 2.0 was an example. 
O'Reilly is heavily invested in that term as a branding strategy 
and big segments of the programmer community reject it as 
that and only that.  Conflict of interests.

Someone has the opportunity to pick up the brand name 
and use it for a blog, maybe several, or a different 
online magazine.  I suspect "XML-Deviant: the Column" 
will find a new home.

len


From: Robin Berjon [mailto:robin.berjon@e...]

Paul Spencer wrote:
> Of course, I never said that when support might have kept it
> going :-(

I don't think it's lack of publicly vocal support that killed it, 
everyone loves the deviant and that's a well-known fact! From its 
beginning right to the end it's been one of my favourite tech columns, 
and I'm sure I'm not alone there.

I think it's just that XML's become a bit boring these days thanks to 
its overwhelming success, and there's not much left to write about that 
hasn't been covered to death already, at least not on as regular a basis 
as the deviant.

• Prev by Date: wc in XML document
• Next by Date: Re: wc in XML document
• Previous by thread: wc in XML document
• Next by thread: RE: wc in XML document
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread