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

Re: ten years later, time to repeat it?

• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• To: "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 09:52:26 -0500

Richard Salz wrote:
>> I think it would be the right place to start, however.  It's unfortunate 
>> that so much effort has been put into burying the 'XML' core under 
>> specifications that boggle users and implementers alike.
> 
> And therein lies the core of why this is just like counting angels on the 
> head of a pin.

No - not at all.

> Like it or not, one of the major reasons for XML's success is the 
> data-binding crowd.
> 
> XML is what it is and you're not gonna find any fluff that hasn't become 
> embedded into the core of some major constituency.

The data-binding crowd is actually the group least likely to even notice 
if they starting receiving feeds in the subset rather than 'full' XML 1.0.

Most of them - frankly, nearly all of them - are already using a subset 
of XML itself, and then piling whatever crap they want on top of it, 
like, say, W3C XML Schemas.  This doesn't touch the layers on top, or 
even disrupt what they're actually using in the foundation.

The only people who would have problems would be people who expected to 
receive the subset, but who got the full pile-on.  These folks might 
well be unhappy, much as people who use XML parsers tend to be unhappy 
when someone sends them an SGML file created by someone who loved The 
SGML Handbook so much that they had to try out all the features.

Angels?  Pins?  I don't think so.  I think this is a case where a small 
group of people would find immediate benefits, a larger group would 
benefit over time, and most people wouldn't notice the difference.

If the world's not interested, of course - that's fine.  I can check 
back in another ten years and see if it's time yet.

Thanks,
Simon St.Laurent
Retired XML troublemaker
http://simonstl.com/

• References:
  • Re: ten years later, time to repeat it?
    • From: Richard Salz <rsalz@u...>