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

Re: Refactoring XML ? was Re: What is an XML Documen

• To: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Subject: Re: Refactoring XML ? was Re: What is an XML Document?
• From: Daniel Veillard <veillard@r...>
• Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 09:21:32 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <LHHGHFF0NK94XWDC1XXU3W83MI7585KF.3c88c25e@MChamp>; from mc@x... on Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 08:53:34AM -0500
• References: <20020308073646.T18835@r...> <LHHGHFF0NK94XWDC1XXU3W83MI7585KF.3c88c25e@MChamp>
• Reply-to: veillard@r...
• User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i

On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 08:53:34AM -0500, Mike Champion wrote:
> More importantly, it will lower the barriers to entry for NEW XML users.  

  I have a hard time with taking this assertion as truth, unless you
expect them to rebuilt their tools from scratch and in that case I really
hope new XML users are not gonna go this way because it definitely doesn't
lower the barrier to reimplement.

> The "XML Revolution" is not won.  In a couple of years the marketing people
> will be looking for the next Next Big Thing, the developers who had trusted
> the IDEs and wizards to hide XML weirdness from them will be debugging systems
> that broke when someone tried to deliver DocBook documents via SOAP (and
> screaming for blood) ,

  I'm tempted to say that this example doesn't hold, you would need to
encapsulate <!DOCTYPE too. IMHO SOAP decided to allow only a subset of
XML-1.0 to be carried because as an *application* of XML they have the right
to subset the set of XML document they accept to handle. I don't see that
as a major reason to make XML match the intersection of what the major
applications accepts. Doing so is actually a very good way to have this
refactorization be helpful for only a tiny amount of the current XML base.

> and"disruptive innovators" will be offering 
> "like XML ... only better" or "actually delivers what XML promised" alternatives.

  Well you find those anyway, whatever the subset chosen.

> I'd say that the XML community should be anticipating, and trying to head
> off, this situation today rather than when it becomes a crisis. 

  It's management basics, yes. I understand the goal, I'm not convinced so
far with the argument that one should follow road A specifically. Actually
I'm still wondering if going any new direction makes real sense.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard@r...  | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Refactoring XML ? was Re: What is an XMLDocument?
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• References:
  • Re: Refactoring XML ? was Re: What is an XML Document?
    • From: Daniel Veillard <veillard@r...>
  • Re: Refactoring XML ? was Re: What is an XMLDocument?
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: "There are six XLink elements" - True or False? Discuss
• Next by Date: Re: Refactoring XML ? was Re: What is an XMLDocument?
• Previous by thread: Re: Refactoring XML ? was Re: What is an XMLDocument?
• Next by thread: Re: Refactoring XML ? was Re: What is an XMLDocument?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread