|
Only
one quibble. When we boycott products, we are not simply boycotting
vendors;
we are
boycotting their developers. This is important. If a developer
cannot for whatever
reason
implement the standard, we have a very different problem from "embrace and
extend". This was at the heart of why we were told XML was created
as a subset of
XML and Schemas were needed over DTDs,
etc. Clarity in requirements and
definitions of capabilities
must be preferred over fuzzy visions of
futures as yet
unknown and potentially unknowable or worse,
unusable. The excuse of Internet
Time once again proves to be the excuse for not having
the patience to do it right
the first time. Beware of "technology adoption"
requirements which insist
on colonization as the first rule of
adaptation.
Len Bullard
Intergraph Public
Safety
clbullar@ingr.com
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard
Ekam
sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
I think I got a bit irate in some of my postings in
response to this, but I was frustrated over people who had swept aside mature,
proven XML technologies and decided to implement the "relevant subset"
themselves -- and they kept doing it wrong! I found it more expedient to build
my own SOAP implementation built atop generic XML technologies, than to waste
time with more specialized SOAP libraries that had major deficiencies and
interoperability issues because the implementors failed to leverage proven,
mature, general XML technologies that were readily available. I think there's
some lessons for folks to learn,
there
| 