[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: RDF and the new releases
You are almost right, Tim. HTML was "bad" in that it created a growing problem of support and extensibility. IOW, it was easy to apply messily and that meant the tag stacker implementor had to support what amounted to tag soup. XML came along to provide a means to create new markup applications but also was touted as a means to clean up that mess. Success depends on perspective. If all one cares about is getting users started and don't mind creating a wildfire of maintenance issues, that's one approach. Success here was colonization. Try that in your swimming pool and learn to love the smell of chlorine. The other approach is to simplify as you suggest, but keep in mind that different eyeballs will have different needs, so that 80/20 point may require more coordinates to locate in real space. 1. Simple 2. Maintainable 3. Extensible 4. Compatible First rule of backfires: don't start the fire until you check the water supply and the precise current position of your teams. len -----Original Message----- From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@t...] ???? HTML was by no means "bad". It was exactly what the world needed, and millions of people started using it because they liked it and because they could do "view source" and figure it out. My gripe with RDF/XML is precisely that it's failing to learn this lesson from HTML's success. Thus not enough people are using it, even though it's arguably what they need.
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|