[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Bob Wyman wrote:
>>XML is the one format that is defined as
>>the "interoperable standard format".
>
> No. XML is not *the* "interoperble standard format." It is
> only one of them.
I've noticed a significant trend in XML fans (mainly off of XML-DEV -
they're better educated here) that XML is great because it's a generic
data format - as if this is a new idea. They seem to think that the
choice is:
1) Define your own format in terms of what bit goes where, like most
binary protocols in RFCs; they have to choose field widths and
endiannesses, and if they define a later version of their protocol, they
have to use previously-unused bits and previously-invalid values to
extend it in complex ways, that general rely on a single authority
defining extensions to the protocol so they don't clash, etc.
or:
2) Write an XML DTD and use an off the shelf toolkit
...while apparently not realising that there are toolkits like ONC XDR
that are probably still more widely available than XML parsers, and
things like IFF and ASN.1.
http://www.borg.com/~jglatt/tech/aboutiff.htm
"Electronic Arts is a company that deserves credit for helping make life
easier for both programmers and end users. By establishing Interchange
Format Files (ie, IFF) and releasing the documentation for such, as well
as C source code for reading and writing IFF type of files, Electronic
Arts has helped make it easier for programmers to develop "backward
compatible" and "extensible" file formats. IFF also helps developers
write programs that easily read data files created with each others' IFF
compliant software, even if there is no business relationship between
the developers. In a nutshell, IFF helps minimize problems such as new
versions of a particular program having trouble reading data files
produced by older versions, or needing a new file format everytime a new
version needs to store additional information. It also encourages
standardized file formats that aren't tied to a particular product. All
of this is good for endusers because it means that their valuable data
isn't locked into some proprietary standard that can't be used with a
wide variety of hardware and software. Above all else, endusers don't
want their work to be held hostage by a single, corporate entity over
whom the enduser has no direct control, but that's exactly what happens
whenever an enduser saves his data using a program that produces a
proprietary, unpublished file format. IFF helps to break this needlessly
proprietary stranglehold that developers have exerted upon endusers' works."
Sound familiar? This road has been trodden before :-)
> bob wyman
ABS
|
