|
|
Re: [xml-dev] Binary XML == "spawn of the devil" ?
|
[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
In a message dated 24/07/2003 16:18:49 GMT Daylight Time, mc@xegesis.org writes:
I agree that only a small minority of "XML" users will need to exchange
binary infoset serializations, but we will *all* benefit by having a growth
path from free/simple/text tools to industrial-strength "bet the business
on" technologies.
Mike,
The expressed intent to move from free tools to "industrial-strength" technologies is likely to reinforce the paranoia of those who view a significant part of W3C activity as being premeditated complexification ... to the point that a typical developer has essentially zero prospect of holding adequate information on W3C XML standards at his/her neuron tips. Result? The entirely predictable one that W3C member companies can provide "solutions" ... proprietary of course ... to this complexity problem that they have been instrumental in creating, with the "coincidental" side-effect of company profits.
The premeditated generation of multiple, increasingly lengthy "open" specifications by W3C Working Groups inevitably creates sufficiently complex and lengthy material that means that the only practical solution for any developer but the 24/7 XML geek is a proprietary one, to the financial benefit of W3C member companies.
Complexity of open standards, when taken to the point it has by W3C with the XML family of technologies, produces a highly effective predictable proprietary lock-in. And, the great attraction of lock-in by that route of premeditated complexification is that it is a *deniable* lock-in ... after all, when viewed superficially, all these standards are open, aren't they?
As I watch the premeditated complexification at the W3C I am reminded of the deep insight contained in the aphorism, "Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean that they are not out to get you.".
Binary XML, viewed in that context, is only a further step in an already active, if highly undesirable, process at W3C.
Andrew Watt
P.S. You did mean it when you invited list members to flame away? :)
|
|
|
|
|
|