Re: Use of XML ?

[Ron Schmelzer <rschmelzer@zapthink.com>]

As we mentioned earlier, we have been looking for comments on the report...
it's not as much "advertised" as it has been meant for comments. I most
appreciate your or anyone else's comments on this report, and we will be
fixing any problems that you think may be present. The problems you mention
below, while seemingly egregious are slight, and we will be fixing them. If
anyone has comments for the report, we would be most interested in fixing
any perceived problems with our pros and cons arguments.

1) Yes, you are right, UDDI is a specification, not a standard. However the
number of ways in which the term "standard" is mis-used far outnumbers its
correct usage.
2) We spend a great amount of detail going into the fact that XML elements
allow a variety of Unicode characters... in fact, we've encapsulated the
Blueberry discussion later. However, I'll locate where the use of Latin was
written and
3) I will locate and eradicate the reference to EBNF.
4) Where did the argument go astray?
5) We meant not to promote but solicit comments and feedback, which you have
graciously given us. The more the better!

A more than cursory read of the report would be great as well ;) This was
meant to be an effort for the community. I hope at least one person has
appreciated the effort!

Ron
--
Senior Analyst
ZapThink
XML Industry Analysts
www.zapthink.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Edd Dumbill" <edd@usefulinc.com>
To: "Ron Schmelzer" <rschmelzer@zapthink.com>
Cc: <Mike.Champion@softwareag-usa.com>; <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 5:45 AM
Subject: Re: Use of XML ?


> On 01 Aug 2001 18:09:41 -0400, Ron Schmelzer wrote:
> > RE: Use of XML ?Once again, I'd like to point out that these very
arguments (and many other ones not even discussed here) are covered in the
"Pros and Cons of XML" document at
http://www.zapthink.com/reports/proscons.html
> >
> > If we've missed something, I'd be more than happy to update the content!
But, we have elucidated about 17-18 "Pro" arguments with counterpoints, and
8-9 "Con" arguments with counterpoints.
>
> I have several comments from a cursory glance of this (repeatedly
> advertised) report.
>
> * You commit the cardinal sin of calling the half-baked UDDI a
> "standard."
>
> * You say XML only allows Latin characters in names.  Poppycock!  See
> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#NT-Name
>
> * You say DTDs use EBNF syntax.  Wrong.
>
> * The section "XML separates process from content" barely makes any
> sense at all.
>
> May I humbly suggest that you refrain from repeated promotion of the
> report on this mailing list.
>
> -- Edd
>
>