[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
When designing an XML specification, when creating an Internet
specification, I can agree. When creating an XML application,
I can't. This isn't short term business perspective; it is
a focused perspective on particular businesses. Unless XML
provides value for money, it simply doesn't go into the
RFP. If not there, not sold. If not sold, not of interest
to business. That is what the USA article is about: getting
value for money from technology.
We all have passions, causes, reasonable society enhancing
agendas. XML can be part of that, but I believe that even
there, saying a thing is good for its own sake is a dangerous
assertion of religious zeal, not common sense.
If a URI string is a very large packed with data string
and some delimiters, isn't it just yetAnotherDelimitedAscii
bag with spec'd delimiters? What are the criteria for
choosing it over XML?
len
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@simonstl.com]
On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 09:02, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> Until you understand that this IS about business,
> XML IS just another whiz-bang technology and not
> worth spending time or money on.
I would really appreciate it if you could at least acknowledge that
business decision-making is not the ONLY criteria for spending time
and/or money on technology. You don't have to come around to my
perspective that business decision-making is in fact a very bad
influence on the technology development process, but I've had far more
than enough business-supremacy for one lifetime.
Short-term business vision seems to be a pretty good explanation for an
enormous amount of foul nastiness currently roaming the XML world. I'd
rather talk angle brackets than dollar signs, and suspect that both the
angle brackets and the dollar signs might get something out of the
conversation.
|
