RE: [xml-dev] SGML complexity

[<juanrgonzaleza@canonicalscience.com>]

sterling said:
>
> Yes, the short term test is "community" but in the end, the technology
> has  to be irreversibly satisfying to some market need and adopted by
> all of  the user members of that market.  The products that support and
> enable  must satisfy the essence of that need.
>
> As I see the market need, it is universal, not niche. The real market is
>  for a universal solution capable of solving any demand for ordered data
>  presentations.  Few want to learn some of the 20000000000000000000
> different --ml languages for each segment of it.

Agree!

Some statistics and feedback from our users/visitors and personal
communications with colleagues confirm that for adopting an XML framework
people strongly disagree managing the unending list: XML, namespaces, DTD,
Schema, XSL-FO, CSS, SVG, c-MathML, p-MathML, CML, XHTML, XLinX, XQuery,
XPath, HlinX, STTML, InfoSet, Canonical XML, XPointer, UnitsML, XInclude,
XSLT, Atom, DOM, DCMI, GML, RDF, SAX, XForms, Xbinding, XBL, XMLI At the
Center

> Most want a language like English, that can be used to present and
> express anything that comes up.  SGML does that.   It takes about 15
> years  for  members of the general population to learn the English
> language, how  long  would it  take for the general population to learn
> SGML?  English is  one of the most hated sujects in grammar and high
> school and I think SGML  would be too, but it is the only language that
> could be truly universal.

Not very universal in humanities today due to non-hierarchies. That is
reason of development of non-SGML alternatives.

> I think the targeted community approach will work for a while, but in
> fewer than six or seven years you might run out of targeted
> niche communities.  There are still a few commodore computer fans!
>
> sterling
>
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, Michael Kay wrote:
>
>> > xml's future is tied up in all these things and more. as is
>> > xslt, and sax.
>>
>> Yes and no. You have to have a critical mass to survive, but you don't
>> need to win a ratings war. Just because J. K. Rowling sells more
>> copies doesn't mean my book is a failure. The test is whether you have
>> a user community that gets benefits from the technology, not whether
>> there are people outside that community who fail to see the benefits,
>> or whether there's the odd person throwing mud from the sidelines.
>>
>> Michael Kay
>> http://www.saxonica.com/
>>


Juan R.

Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE)