Lists Home |
Date Index |
10/8/2002 7:41:26 AM, Paul Prescod <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>Somewhat wide-ranging and IMHO, not entirely coherent (XML as a
>branding issue?) but nevertheless worth reading to see what everyone
>else is reading.
Note the authorship very carefully. They are selling rain gear, so
they predict storms. Also note the business trajectory of the last
company the first author founded to assess the value of his insight.
[I heard an interview on NPR yesterday using the term "glass floor"
to describe the phenomenon of CEOs who "the system" does not allow
to fall to the ground after spectacular failure.]
Still, the fact that he attracted capital in this business
environment after spectacularly blowing hundreds of millions of dollars
could indicate that their story resonates with potential customers.
I get the impression that the things we rant about here are finally
coming to the attention of the consumers of XML. For example:
"Even though XML is a lingua franca, the price of its expedience has
become complexity and inefficiency.... Companies may be sitting on
a goldmine of XML services and be unaware of it. They may also be
sitting on potential problems.
...A simple XML message might contain three to five "namespaces"
from three to five different standards. ...
The message alone may be complex enough, but competing standards,
versioning and styling choices further complicate it."
I have no idea whether the author's new company really has a handle
on this or not. (I don't think they've said anything about their
technology yet). If so, it will be interesting to watch what they
can actually do. If not, it's still evidence that "XML" is perceived
as as having some repair work to do on the foundations before it
is ready for storm season.
[my personal bitterness and angst, of course; please don't hold my
employer accoutable for it]