[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> and other nits are elaborated, but at the end, the same
> answer 'because it is there' or 'there are no attractive
> alternatives' are given. Laziness or just momentum?
"There are no attractive alternatives" holds most true, I suspect.
Laziness maybe of folks to come up with something thats actually
better, if anything.
>That XML will be replaced eventually
> is almost certain given it's inefficiencies for this
> particular application.
How about "the *use* of XML will be replaced eventually..." XML is
about far more than messaging.
> o A simpler XML?
Other than schema, could it get much simplier, really?
> o A smarter XML?
That I agree with.
> o Binary XML
And that's more simple?
> o Objects
Wait, I thought this was a conversation about messaging, not about
sending serialized object graphs. You'd do one or the other, not both.
At least I would. Others would too.
Thanks!
Kent Tegels
DevelopMentor
Blog: http://staff.develop.com/ktegels
|
