Lists Home |
Date Index |
Come on Jens. I am glad you put a ? after Case proved.
Like there are bad database design and bad code design, there is badly structured XML. The example you provide to make a
point is one such case. I can do the same with CSV as well.
As pointed out earlier, it is not a well formed XML. XML does provide a syntax for writing "XML Documents" that is both
human and machine readable. Whether you put the effort into making it machine and human readable is as always upto you.
The interesting stuff is always going to be in what you do with the tags. And that depends on what the tags mean in your
I like Mike's description that XML as "post OO". The OO and RPC guys are all focussed on building a better, cheaper and
faster CORBA/DCOM or whatever and working on data bindings so that they can go from relational to objects to XML. To
these guys XML is one way of serializing their objects and send it over the wire. While there are others who are
focussing on developing integration methods where there is complete decoupling in the process, time and channel space.
To these guys the data or message sent as a XML document has to mean something. That something can be a big standard in
specific industry groups or just negotiated between 2 partners.
I do not understand what the whole fuss is about. We should have learnt long time ago that nothing replaces anything.
It just becomes another tool to use.
> This is one of the hypes about XML, that I'd like to defuse. XML is not any more self-describing than CSV files. E.g.
> What is this?
> Case proved?
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
Soumitra Sengupta, Ph.D.
Co-Founder and C.T.O.
B-Bop Associates Inc.
Fax : 650-340-2701