[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Miles Sabin wrote:
> Sean McGrath wrote,
>
> >The world is swimming in such attempts at platform independent
> >fundamental datatypes. None have succeeded in reaching broad
> >acceptance.
> >
> >Time to ask "why?" don't you think? :-)
>
>
> Certainly ...
>
> But in fairness to ASN.1, this is orthogonal to datatyping and is an
> issue for XML as well.
XML has "broad acceptance."
> We might have ambitions for it to be genuinely
> universal, but the reality is that it's just another one of the many
> 'universal' notations we have to deal with.
I don't visit other galaxies. "Broadly accepted" is universal enough for
me. XML's market share as measured in implementations, tools, books and
developer eyeballs is on a totally different order than that of the
various other universal data notations (with or without datatypes). The
possible exception is CSV (which is hardly competitive in most of XML's
domains).
Paul Prescod
|
