xml-dev - RE: interoperability (was Re: Obfuscating XML with namespaces)

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

In the CALS era, this was referred to as the 
"wedding ring" of a vendor/customer relationship. 
Taking it off meant free exchange of information.
Lessons learned:

1.  It is never free.
2.  It may be data, not information.
3.  It is a marriage because it is a binding contract.

Only as procurement gets into the game and officials 
understand the role of contracting does the use of 
standards get better.  

Those who think it can be done without namespaces 
and schemas are the ones putting the ring 
on their relationships customers.  Lock in happens 
because of laissez-faire contracting.  A pre-nup 
helps when it gets down to renegotiating.

XML doesn't care.  That is precisely why we 
can use it for portable data that enables 
interoperation.  It is a bridge across islands 
of automation.

Len Bullard
Intergraph Public Safety
clbullar@ingr.com
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Winer [mailto:dave@userland.com]
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 11:02 AM
To: Simon St.Laurent; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: interoperability (was Re: Obfuscating XML with namespaces)


Simon, this is fascinating.

Check out this rambly Information Week article.

http://www.informationweek.com/807/07uwhl.htm

My pov: XML should be providing a means for interop between all kinds of
apps. It should be happening now.

Every day it's delayed the hole we have to dig out of gets deeper.

It's all about interop, as far as I'm concerned. It's prosaic stuff for
sure, but it's also the holy grail of the software industry..

No lock-in, use my product because it's the best, and it's easy to switch.

Dave