[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
1++
I don't ignore them. I program too. But I don't
want to lose the greatest advantage of XML as
stated in your first sentence. And in a Googling
world where what one says is amplified by position
in a set of "reliable sources", the urge to become
a reliable source must be accompanied by the sense
of even greater responsibility for what is said.
If the SME can go to his boss with Googled quotes
from Bray and Skonnard saying XML is for programmers,
it is a persuasive way to get XML off their job
description, and then, off all job descriptions
for non-programmers.
We cannot escape that the WWW is one part a
system of programs and hardware, and in larger
part, a social community with practices, behaviors,
and a never ending learning curve. That is why
when someone says anything that doesn't help the
software is irrelevant philosophy, I wonder
if that one hit his head on the steam pipe.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Skonnard [mailto:aarons@develop.com]
XML is for developers. XML is for authors. XML is for anyone that needs
to add type and structure to information.
You simply cannot ignore the large class of organizations turning to XML
as an application communication mechanism where programs both generate
and consume the XML messages used in the system. There are no "authors"
involved because the subject matter expert in this case is the
"programmer" that originally defined the data structures used in the
system.
-aaron
http://staff.develop.com/aarons
|
