Lists Home |
Date Index |
I never was a fan of SML. I like XML 1.0 as it is, warts and all. But I
think a variation of SML is in order these days. This past thread has helped
me crystallize what lies behind my ambivalence towards the state of XML today:
1) The major foundations of XML are truly brilliant, its flaws being very
modest for a technology of its age.
2) The second round of XML development through the W3C is confused,
confusing, and counterproductive to the felicity of (1)
My own definition of successful XML is as follows:
- Basically all that makes up Tim Bray's XML Skunkworks document
- XPath 1.0
- XSLT 1.0 + EXSLT
There are other successful vocabularies built on this foundation, such as SVG,
but I'm mostly dwelling on the foundation.
It is amazing what can be built using of XPath. I have been surprised over
and over again at how well it strikes the balance between processing needs and
XSLT is a wonderful tool for generic XML processing, and its extension system
allows a very clean layering between generic and application-specific
processing. From what I have seen, one can optimize and solve other
domain-specific problems through this layered approach just as well as if XSLT
were a complete GP programming language.
I'm not sure where all this leads. I know that many others have a similar
view. Perhaps we just need to be sure that the best of XML is still properly
represented in the user communities and the press even as the second, dubious
wave washes ashore. I don't know whether this requires a Web site, an
advocacy group, or what.
But I do think I have a clearer picture of what is right and wrong about XML
Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc.
Track chair, XML/Web Services One (San Jose, Boston):
RDF Query using Versa - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-thi
WSDL and the Wild, Wild West - http://adtmag.com/article.asp?id=6004
XML, The Model Driven Architecture, and RDF @ XML Europe -