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

RE: XML=WAP? And DOA?

• To: 'Al Snell' <alaric@a...>
• Subject: RE: XML=WAP? And DOA?
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 10:27:53 -0600
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

Particularly if you attach a high amperage portable 
generator.  Dress the rabbit as the turtle.  One 
can make almost anything fail if you work at it 
hard enough.  Making something succeed takes 
less work but you have to define a measure of 
success.  It may be money, it may be ease, it may 
be the vanishing sound of feet, etc; choose one or all.

XML thrives based on the re-applicability of the 
tools that support it, for example, using the same 
editor for multiple formats.  XML stumbles when 
that works but is tool-inappropriate.  For example, 
using a pure XML editor to manipulate graphics.  The 
problem is picking the object via the most recognizable 
object, in this case, the graphic itself.

While there are lots of more appropriate formats for 
particular tasks, conceptually, markup works best in 
the most tasks.   What is said about it and mainstream 
computing today was said about

o  mini-computers
o  PCs
o  C
o  C++ (and almost every oopl since)
o  HTML (and almost every SGML application before and since)
o  LISP (still repeated and often)

the list goes on.   Spy vs Spy: one side has an agenda and 
the other side has a bomb.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Al Snell [mailto:alaric@a...]

On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Atchley, John wrote:

> Finally, if XML does go DOA, I think the cause will be a backlash from XML
> projects failing because XML was a poor choice for those particular projects
> to begin with.

Yeah... hype can be negative as well as positive...

• Prev by Date: RE: XML newbie
• Next by Date: Limericks and XML...
• Previous by thread: RE: XML=WAP? And DOA?
• Next by thread: Re: SV: SV: XML=WAP? And DOA?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread