Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Tue, 2002-05-07 at 10:49, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> 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.
It's hard to sustain that level of outreach in the face of a second wave
of specifications from the place people consider the keeper of XML with
support from vendors who make it easy to drink the kool-aid.
I suspect that keeping resources available to developers who want to
consider alternatives is probably a good approach, though that will
likely require creating a lot of those resources. Advocacy groups might
be a part of that, but managing those can be a challenge in itself,
especially without resources to support them.
Jon Bosak told some good stories on the Geek Cruise last year about XML
getting started. His being "strident" and being able to rally a core
community of developers who could focus on building from "monastic SGML"
(was that Eliot Kimber's term?) got us XML.
XML seems to be lurching well beyond the wildest complexities of SGML. I
guess we just need to keep the notions of simpler practice alive, see
what parts of new specs look appropriate, and wait for the inevitable
implosion. Could be waiting a long while, of course.
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!