OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] Why XML for Messaging?

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Because Sun goes to the trouble of getting an 
international standard for it.  Microsoft is 
fighting that idea.

"Paoli's passion for XML and documents shined through the entire talk,
especially two of the final points. He spoke out against binary XML, simply
saying "No, please," and concluded with a prediction: In 2010 75% of new
documents worldwide will be created in XML."

The business models of the customers prefer 
standards.  Paoli's tactic ultimately means no binaries 
unless they are Microsoft-framework supported. 
Yes, we can do what you suggest.   Why bother? 
We can do that with FastInfoset and be both 
standard and indemnified. Note that this isn't 
just Microsoft.  IBM is fighting it, the XML 
community is fighting it, everyone I suspect 
but the graphics folks and other performance
bound implementors.

Using big vendor frameworks in situations like 
this is like dating a vampire: the vampire is  
sophisticated, rich, slick, and hey it can fly but  
just before the light begins to dawn on you, 
it puts the bite on you and now you too have to 
live in the shadows.

My advice to the middle tier vendors:  instead 
of accepting the vampire's embrace, implement 
the most framework and platform independent 
means you have even if that means returning to 
C and C++ and taking on the costs of creating 
libraries.  The short term productivity benefits 
of using the frameworks are becoming riskier. 
The independence that XML provided is being 
replaced by dependence on the libraries and 
this is far riskier to your marketshare as it 
enables the platform provider to invade and 
possess your market while you can't guarantee 
performance.   Don't give up your 
power to negotiate which is ultimately your 
willingness to walk away from the table.


(also speaking solely for myself and not 
my employer)

From: Dare Obasanjo [mailto:dareo@microsoft.com]

> Because where one wants to use XML machinery without XML 
> syntax on the wire, one has to have the infrastructure and if 
> that means getting it from Sun, so be it.  MS doesn't get to 
> play in that market.

Then we are now in the infoset permathread.  Sure anyone can come up
with a framework that enables passing around binary representations of
XML. APIs like SAX and the .NET Framework's XmlReader can be implemented
over binary streams as well as text XML. 

I'm not sure where the idea that this is technology exclusive to Sun and
not Microsoft comes from. Can you clarify? 


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS