[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 12:29:52 -0700, Uche Ogbuji
<Uche.Ogbuji@fourthought.com> wrote:
> My own personal regret is that I have spent so much of my energy since
> 1997 implementing W3C specs and such with excessive literal-mindedness,
> including DOM, XPath, XSLT, etc. Developments such as SOAP, XQuery and
> DOM L3 finally made it clear to me that the W3C* and many other such
> organizations seem bent on maximum complexity in XML.
It's not so much that, as the fact that they're guessing. Inevitably,
some parts of the complexity will be necessary -- life isn't always
simple -- but without meaningful implementation experience, we don't
know *which* parts, so the working groups put them all in just to be
safe. That's why we're stuck with the SOAP envelope stuff, for
example, rather than simple XML over HTTP, and why XSLT 2.0 apparently
gives neck massages, makes coffee, and does your taxes as well as
transforming XML documents.
> Many of my fellow
> Pythoneers tried to convince me earlier to plump for simplicity and
> Python idiom. Amara XML Toolkit represents the fact that I'm just now
> coming around to properly appreciating their point of view.
I'm not a Pythoneer, but welcome to the club all the same, Uche.
Worse-is-Better almost always wins, and XML has no special immunity to
that rule.
All the best,
David
--
http://www.megginson.com/
|
