[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002 11:21:00 -0500, Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
wrote:
> If it's going to be done, it should probably be done in a forum designed
> to prevent vendor (or even vendor class) lock-in and preserve
> interoperability.
Yup. That's why I (and Robin Berjon, I suppose) are spending the energy to
try
to persuade Tim that the idea is not as stupid and evil as it may appear
at first glance :-). The "binary infoset" genie is out of the bottle. The
question
now is whether he serves the industry as a whole in a reasonably sane
and IP-free way, or whether he serves several proprietary masters in
a fragmented and patent-encumbered manner :-)
Y'all want to stuff him back in the bottle, fine ... but it's not me that
you have to convince. My strong preference would be for the "one standard
human-readable syntax" position if I had my druthers. I totally agree
(e.g.
with an article by Sean McGrath) that in the vast majority of XML
*applications*
the parsing overhead / bloat issue is a red herring. I wish that were also
true of the rapidly growing XML messaging *infrastructure*, but that's
simply
not the reality I'm being made more and more aware of, in both my day
job world and my W3C Web services world.
|
