[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] Has XML run its course?
- From: Didier PH Martin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 16:12:17 -0400
Your message made me think. Here is the result of my thinking.
Have you heard about the Geoffrey Moore technology introduction curve (ref:
crossing the chasm)?
I think that XML is now crossing the chasm. How? by being fragmented into
niche markets. Therefore you are right, there is no more XML per se now but
more languages built with it. Each language represents a solution, a
potential market. Take for instance, VoiceXML, an XML derived language, this
language is not necessarily used by anybody doing XML, only by those that
need to create voice enabled applications (running mostly on the phone).
In some niches, we can already spot some visionaries building systems that
will give them some competitive advantage based on one or more XML based
language. However, I think that we haven't crossed the chasm yet. The
pragmatist are not yet buying XML. They still need to see some convincing
examples. For instance, in the case of an XML language, VoiceXML, Tellme is
perceived as a visionary and this is why we know see some enterprises and
carriers implementing voiceXML applications. They all saw the advantages and
the scalability of the technology through the tellme site. The day Yahoo
will say that their site is based on the XSLT language to adapt their
content to the rendering devices, we'll see pragmatists to install such
systems and XSLT will enter into the tornado stage.
Conclusion: XML has to cross the chasm, some XML based technologies are
currently crossing it. To cross the chasm, a technology has to be adapted to
the different market segments. This is what is happening. There is no more
XML per se, but a plethora of languages based on it. So, the next stage is
that we hear about applications created with XML based languages. That these
applications reduced cost, made people's life better than before, that it
can do things we couldn't before, etc... We have now to give answers to
pragmatists no longer to technology enthusiasts or early adopters. And
pragmatists do not ask the same questions and seek different things.
Didier PH Martin