Lists Home |
Date Index |
At 12:14 PM 9/10/2002 -0400, Keith W. Boone wrote:
>Because you are talking to the wrong people, probably. Most folks on this
>list are IMHO more likely generally interested in XML and supporting
>technologies, rather than working with specific XML dialects. Folks who
>work with the more specific dialects are not likely to be on this list
>unless they are truly XML geeks.
>Check out http://www.xml.org/xml/registry.jsp for an a listing [incomplete]
>of a variety XML dialects [190 listed here].
>With so many dialects to choose from, it's hard to pick those linked to any
>one business and say it has has major impact, because most business sectors
>just are not that pervasive. Not counting the computer software industry
>[where XML is huge], the next most likely candidates are dialects used in
>the financial services or news media sectors, and I'm just not that in touch
>with those sectors to offer any opinions.
OK, so I went to that URL and picked the first category that looked
financial and businessy, which was Accounting:
It lists 5 things:
1. papiNet Version 1.10
Description: papiNet covers transactions between parties within the Paper
Supply Chain. papiNet is intended to provide value to all partners in the
Paper Supply Chain.
2. XML Topic Maps (XTM) 1.0 Core Deliverables
3. XML Topic Maps (XTM) 1.0. TopicMaps
4. XML Topic Maps (XTM) Processing Model 1.0
5. Grant Red Book DTD V2.4
Submitter: United States Patent and Trademark Office
Description: DOCUMENT TYPE DEFINITION FOR UNITED STATES PUBLISHED PATENT
DOCUMENTS USPTO- MODIFIED VERSION OF WIPO STANDARD ST.32 DTD Reference this
DTD as PUBLIC "-//USPTO//DTD ST.32 US PATENT GRANT V2.4 2000-09-20//EN"
Alias: Grant Red Book (GRB)
Are you saying that people involved with accounting go to this web site to
find the agreed-upon vocabulary for representing accounting information?
Which of these 5 things would they use?
Turning to banking, there is only one vocabulary listed, OFX:
Can anybody tell me the status of OFX? There is a press release saying over
1000 companies adopted it, in January 2001, and Checkfree, Intuit, and
Microsoft all said they would use it. Is this an example of a successful,
widespread business vocabulary, or did it turn out to be hype? I suspect
that this one is for real, but I don't have any hard data to make me
confident that this is the case.
On to business services:
Here we have three schemas, for business associates, work orders, and
customers. But I haven't heard of any of them.
Do you get my drift?