[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Particularly if you attach a high amperage portable
generator. Dress the rabbit as the turtle. One
can make almost anything fail if you work at it
hard enough. Making something succeed takes
less work but you have to define a measure of
success. It may be money, it may be ease, it may
be the vanishing sound of feet, etc; choose one or all.
XML thrives based on the re-applicability of the
tools that support it, for example, using the same
editor for multiple formats. XML stumbles when
that works but is tool-inappropriate. For example,
using a pure XML editor to manipulate graphics. The
problem is picking the object via the most recognizable
object, in this case, the graphic itself.
While there are lots of more appropriate formats for
particular tasks, conceptually, markup works best in
the most tasks. What is said about it and mainstream
computing today was said about
o mini-computers
o PCs
o C
o C++ (and almost every oopl since)
o HTML (and almost every SGML application before and since)
o LISP (still repeated and often)
the list goes on. Spy vs Spy: one side has an agenda and
the other side has a bomb.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Al Snell [mailto:alaric@alaric-snell.com]
On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Atchley, John wrote:
> Finally, if XML does go DOA, I think the cause will be a backlash from XML
> projects failing because XML was a poor choice for those particular projects
> to begin with.
Yeah... hype can be negative as well as positive...
|
