Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On 18/07/2021 23:44, Arjun Ray wrote: > On Sun, 18 Jul 2021 20:52:27 +0200, Marcus Reichardt wrote: > > | I guess the fixation on JSON by the XML community is because JSON ate > | XML's lunch in lucrative enterprise integration, so to speak. > > Bingo. XML was first in line at the lunch counter but it turned out to be the wrong meal. > [...] Text interchange, XML's original calling, fell by the wayside. Actually not: it's alive and well and living in the publishing industry where it belongs. And in Humanities Computing. On 19/07/2021 02:32, Rick Jelliffe wrote: > Forget [...] Yes, lots of stuff that should never have been allowed out without a minder. > [...] industrial users of XML, the very ones who had initiated the > development of XML, never got onside and so it flopped: I believe > that the reason was that without public entities, it was not > practical: the straw that broke the camel's back. Possibly, but at the time, ISO 10646 / Unicode was incomplete and widely unsupported. > Now, of course, I do have many other pet things I would have loved > to see added or removed. We all have our own :-) On 19/07/2021 19:23, Gavin Nicol wrote: > ... and don't forget that XML also inherited all the baggage of > schema, RDF, etc. etc. which seriously skewed perceptions, even > though it was guilt by association. I think all of those came after XML. But yes, they are unwanted baggage. > I've often thought it'd be interesting to try and push XML back into > the browser. <plug> Come to my talk at Balisage on rendering XML with CSS in the browser :-) </plug> Peter
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
