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

Re: XML=WAP? And DOA?


doa mix free download

---- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Champion" <mc@x...>

> >Why restrict ourselvs to 'one markup language, that fits 
> all' ?
> 
> Metcalfe's Law -- the value of a technology rises with the 
> square of the number of users.  To some extent, costs of 
> "forcing square pegs into round holes" are outweighed by 
> economies of scale, familiarity, tool availability, etc.  For 
> example, let's say that I had some data I needed to exchange, 
> and YAML or Chunks was just perfect for my needs whereas XML 
> was overkill.  BUT the folks on the other end would have to 
> be educated on what YAML/Chunks is all about (whereas they 
> have had XML shoved in their faces for years now), would have 
> to be supplied with tools (XML comes "for free" with every 
> platform), so it would probably be cheaper and easier to do 
> it clumsily with XML than elegantly with YAML/chunks.  
> 
> XML doesn't restrict the alternatives, but its success makes 
> them less and less viable EVEN WHEN THEY ARE BETTER SUITED TO 
> A SPECIFIC TASK. 

I don't see any problem with that. For a very long time, developers 
were spending countless hours, tracing bugs in  malloc / free and *ptr++
code ( the smart ones have written plenty of libraries that would 
help them in tracing those bugs. Still - pretty much useless activity). 

As a result, developers got *so* frustrated with that activity, that 
it was very easy for them to understand why garbage collection 
( which is not an obvious concept, BTW ) is 'the way to go'. 

The more people will hit their heads trying to process XML
with standard APIs - the easeir it would be to make a next 
step. 

I'm almost sure that somebody tried to make a next step 
already ( well, YAML tried for sure ), I'm afraid that we 
just don't know.

I'm sorry for repeating myself, but XSLScript ( and XQuery ;-),  
is  *mixing*  non-xml-ish syntax with XML. Of course, 
the resulting mix is no longer XML. But it is *very* 
handy *because* it is not XML. .

And how do you call the resulting mix ( with < and with { ) 
Isn't it ... just another markup language? ;-)

Perhaps, XML ++ is already here. There were some 
libraries (in  C)  implemeting garbage collection
long time before Java, but C developers were 
too bisy, writing their 'malloc / free' code to 
notice them.

> >That would be also the right thing to do! 
> 
> Worse is better, sigh.  Not many people like that fact, but 
> even fewer have prospered by betting against it.

Yep.

Rgds.Paul.



PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.