[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: The Best Technologies Don't Win
It isn't so much that the best technologies don't win, it is that they don't matter in an evolutionary game of selection. Remember, this isn't a Darwinian model; it is a model of evolutionary stable strategy and in that game, all that is required is that the dominating genetic base/rule set/schema/architecture (pick one) cannot be replaced by a minority or invader set. (This is a model that is more robust than a Nash equilbrium because it doesn't rely on rational players.) 1. To dispute Rick Jeliffe a bit: there are applications that use the exotic non-overlapping functionalities of XSD. The one that comes to mind in the markets I see is GJXDM. Why? It needs a data dictionary that is customized, not a single schema for one XML application. Why? It must map to multiple overlapping local jurisdictions because the Federal government does not have the power to mandate local system reporting requirements except insofar as these report up the chain through the State switches to Federal databases, and insofar as grant money is predicated on conformance to Federal standards. These are very loose functional relationships. I suspect that for many multi-million dollar buys, this is true. When building a web site, the functional relationships that dominate the requirements are different, but they require many sales. The scaling qualities are quite different. 2. When picking among the alternatives, requirements dominate clever code. A very real challenge to cat herding is knowing which cats are doing something useful, say, can be sold in a contracting environment if you sell big systems. If the RFPs require an SOA that uses GJXDM-derived Reference Models to derive local schemas (the problem is not XML or REST; the problem is local jurisdictional choice over Federal models), then attempting to apply REST/RELAX means losing the contract, not the technology. If one bids 'strong-objects with data entities', one loses. It doesn't matter that the code is clever; it matters that it doesn't map to the requirements AS WRITTEN. Web architecture isn't as important to big sales as selling applications that use the Internet and a message switch. If you take the path of architecture and open source, you have to map it to the requirements in the customer's solicitation. Otherwise, you end up with $4 a share stock (see Sun) because you lose too many big sales. The evolutionary game is won in the Proposal response to the Request for Proposal, not the coding shop. Sad but so. The low cost transport model uses the bidding process, not the design process. One can feed the other but that is very slow and the trade IS time for energy. Until you shape the customer's preferences, you lose. Note carefully the function of abstract types over derived types. That is the requirement for GJXDM and any other schema that has to map into multiple local customizations. len
|
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
|