RE: An open plea to the W3C (was Re: XInclude vs SAX vs

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

Agreed but they have had significant success with ADA 
in very large systems development.  I don't know 
what they poured into it, but at the time, the 
systems they were attempting to build called for 
very careful code management and integration.  
Loose coupling wasn't the right answer there as 
it can be here.

They did not box themselves in.  A procurement 
officer could always waive the requirement and 
many did.

Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

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


-----Original Message-----
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@simonstl.com]

The politics of Ada are worth keeping in mind in this story, however.
The Pentagon poured huge (some would say unseemly) amounts of money into
the project, largely because they had boxed themselves in.  Ada's
current success, as a minor niche player even after that investment,
doesn't seem like a good target to aim for, frankly.

Those resources will not be available for most XML work, nor will the
results of such massive investments necessarily be available to the
general public.

Complexity in this locale is generally poisonous.