Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: XML 2004 weblog items?
- From: Michael Champion <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:44:57 -0500
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=g93+YJ/E3WQ34cBjg2fOTvDPdyx6T8cWyeLFmBztVTuVBxp09ODvgo3RvWRzthTw7ojGdawRV/aThvbCg4vu7BsOs5uDreLvq5m6lXUcmchAqSBVrmm+P2VxwjfhCWx1zQjx6jsdKJr8irXdo9ZqgM2CFalhrruJJP+Js60Ekds=
- Reply-to: Michael Champion <email@example.com>
Last year it seemed as though there were a lot of weblog entries that
discussed XML 2003-inspired topics. I haven't seen very many this
year ... there is Edd's set at
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/96, Dare's summary of his
Tim Bray's piece at
http://tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2004/11/20/Tribal (which is about
people, not technology ... but a Must See for xml-dev lurkers who want
to know what Len Bullard looks like!).
Am I missing some others by subscribing to the wrong feeds? I'd be
especially interested in reaction / commentary about the keynote
Or did Len's appearance render everyone speechless?
Anyone who is too busy to blog but wants to dump their thoughts might
want to respond to one of the following conversation starters:
The 'binary XML' stuff got a lot less hostile reception than I
expected. Is the world ready to hear that XML 1.x text serialization
is not suitable for wireless applications, is this old news, or what?
The Semantic Web stuff seemed to get a lot of favorable buzz and not
too much pushback. Is the world ready to hear that tags alone don't
make data "self-describing", was this a friendly government audience
that wants to believe there is a technological fix for their problems,
There was less about web services / SOA on the program this year. Is
the world just quietly using these technologies, sick of hearing the
hype, or what?