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

Re: The parts of XML that are enduring and the parts thatare c

• From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
• To: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>
• Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 17:34:03 -0400

On Thu, 2013-08-29 at 17:30 +0000, Costello, Roger L. wrote:

> What does this mean: 
> 
> 	XML as a writing system, as a documentary system

I suppose, XML as a textual framework and annotative system, might be
clearer. I did not mean writing system in the sense of script (such as
Devanagari).
> 
> English is a writing system. German is a writing system.
They are languages; in the sense I meant, a paper, pencil, the Latin
alphabet and punctuation symbols, combined with conventions for their
use, constitute a writing system.

Wikipedia has [[
A writing system is an organized regular method (typically standardized)
of information storage and transfer for the communication of messages
(expressing thoughts or ideas) in a language by visually (or possibly
tactilely) encoding and decoding (known as writing and reading) with a
set of signs or symbols, both known generally as characters (with the
set collectively referred to as a 'script').[1] These characters, often
including letters and numbers, are usually recorded onto a durable
medium such as paper or electronic storage/display, although non-durable
methods may also be used, such as writing in sand or skywriting.
]]

> What does this mean:
> 
> 	XML as infrastructure, XML Web Services
> 
> Roads and buildings are infrastructure. What does it mean that XML has
> been used as infrastructure? Do you mean the use of the XML format for
> exchanging data with REST web services? That is crumbling? (It doesn't
> appear to be crumbling from my perspective, but my view of the world
> is narrow) What is the trend in infrastructure, in web services? To
> exchange JSON documents?

SOAP-based (non-RESTful) Web servies are in some (many?) contexts being
replaced with JSON-based APIs.

XML doesn't make a very good basis for program-to-program communication
because it doesn't match the features of programming languages very
well. For representing users' documents and data this can be a _good_
thing, because it means the information is represented in a way that's
independent of any particular program: the information is owned by the
users, not by the programmers. But for program-to-program communication
the user _is_ the programmer.

By infrastructure I mean the things we humans put in place to support
our communities - structures like roads, canals, footpaths, as well as
social structures like police and ambulances.

In computing terms the infrastructure is the part of the system that
lets us run programs, store data, and communicate, and includes for
example the operating environments, shared file formats and network
protocols.

Liam

-- 
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml

• References:
  • The parts of XML that are enduring and the parts that are crumblingaway
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>