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

Re: SML: Second Try

• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: SML: Second Try
• From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 10:10:44 -0500
• In-reply-to: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EEEACEE0@h...>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EEEACEE0@h...>
• User-agent: Opera7.0/Win32 M2 build 2637

On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 08:16:43 -0600, Bullard, Claude L (Len) 
<clbullar@i...> wrote:


>
> If SOAP did not work because of the features it does not use, that would 
> be a different issue.  It does work.  What is the problem?

"Unicode with angle brackets" demonstrably works.  That doesn't mean that 
the XML 1.0 spec, the whole 1.0 spec, and nothing but the XML 1.0 spec 
demonstrably works.

Since XML "works" for many things, people are pushing it harder.  The 
problem is that when the envelope is pushed, the rough edges cause 
considerable drag, in performance, interoperability, amount of code needed 
to do what one would think would be simple stuff (such as combining 
separate components into a single document), and so on. That's what unites 
many of the permathreads here: SML, BinaryXML, InfoSet vs syntax, document 
vs data ... people are finding that XML works, sorta, but conclude that it 
could work better for them with a few lops or tweaks. Even authoring simple 
documents -- a core use case if there ever was one -- is a pain in the butt 
for non-geeks, hence the SML, WikiML, etc.  things that people are 
inventing to make their lives easier.   Organized communities of users are 
writing "interoperability profiles" that warn developers away from some of 
bits of the XML 1.0 spec.  Isn't that a sign of a "problem"?

Innovation and deprecation are taking place precisely because XML works 
well enough to be worth learning, but not well enough to stifle arguments 
about changes and alternatives.  The question as I see it is whether the 
keepers of XML should work to make the core of XML adapt to all this change 
and experience, or let nature take its course and let the different 
communities fork off.  Reasonable people disagree on this, but few assert 
that the SML, binary XML, Web services, etc. users of XML aren't motivated 
by "problems" applying XML.

• References:
  • RE: SML: Second Try
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: SML: Second Try
• Next by Date: RE: SML: Second Try
• Previous by thread: RE: SML: Second Try
• Next by thread: RE: SML: Second Try
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread