|
Don't know what happened to this post. Seems to
have been obfuscated amongst the lost (the dog ate them)
algorithms.
The fact that I've so far received one, count em, 1
url that approaches my question is both troublesome and honorific.
The question was: Where is the model for XML based
websites?
here is the xcerion prolog in case it was missed:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"
standalone="yes"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl"
href="layout/xcerion.xsl"?>
You can't solve a problem if you haven't taken the time to study it long
enough to write a good algorithm. What I'm thinking is that if XML is working
properly I shouldn't need a Biztalk Server or it's equivalent. I should be
able to write all software in native XML. That includes databases, algorithms,
gui's, and everything else including the related schemas. Are we there
yet?
>
Dennis,
>
> I've been working on XML based websites for a number of
years for my
> employer. I've done a number of projects, from simple
REST service type
> applications, to web sites that use one or two XML
documents as
> datasources, to web sites that are through and through
XML+XSL.
'to web sites that are through and through XML+XSL'
Are these
intranets, or can I take a peek?
I'm learning XML from the XMLSpec up. My
previous websites have been a
combination of HTML, JavaScript, CSS, and ASP
(I dropped the Java applets).
The promise of XML is that it is a set of
technologies that will replace all
of that. So, some 5+ years later I have
yet to see a website cooked entirely
out of XML technologies (exempt XHTML
because it is really HTML5), as if
everyone is waiting for Eve Maler to write
a schema.
> My question is... Why are you so interested in making
everything so XML
> dependent?
Simplicity. Let's get on with it. I
have a library full of obsolete
technologies which represent wasted time. I'm
much more interested in
researching and developing content. Yet the
medi(a/um) has consumed 50% of
my time with little quirks like the browser
wars. We all know where this is
going. All of the XML technologies are going
to be wrapped into one tight
little package. Meanwhile, the software
companies will attempt to soak
developers for the hundreds of versions along
the way, while doubling the
size of my obsolete collection.
For
example, billions of dollars later Microsoft has yet to produce a
completely
integrated office suite. They are feeding on XML now with IBM,
SUN and
others. I don't want to wait 5 more years for this technology to
unfold. If
it's going to end up on a network, the Internet, then by now
there should be
a working model. If not now then soon. I'm not looking for
an XML layer. I'm
looking for the eXtensible Markup Language that does what
it has promised,
simply, cheaply, and effectively as one package without
relying on a list of
related acronyms.
Here's an idea: Take the left column of the homepage of
W3C and squish it
down to one acronym. Call it XML.
>You should
only use XML if you need it, and right now you've not really
given us a good
explanation of WHY you need it.
The marketing teams at the software
companies are doing a fine job of
pushing web services. I'm an integration
advocate. Here's a scenerio: a
business. I want a singular fully automated
computer system that contains
all aspects of the business from personnel and
finance to marketing,
logistics, operations, and outward to the consumer.
This system needs to be
able to talk to all internal processes at all
branches of the corporation,
and to external clients and vendors. What do we
have now? We have 10
different systems approaching 10 discrete problems. We
have different
platforms, different languages, personnel staffing related to
each
technology, and on and on. From the user standpoint, users who are
being
asked to multitask and cross-train, each 'layer' produces a dynamic
stress
level that is not additive but geometric. Further, the scope of
system
integration is ripping at the fabric of the core business, namely
the
budget. So where is XML? It seems to be stuck in a layer, when it should
be
the company cookbook for all things
automated.
|
