[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basicprinciples of MicroXML"
- From: "Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca>
- To: Len Bullard <Len.Bullard@ses-i.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:46:02 +0000
>
> IADS predates web browsers but already used style sheets,
> hyperlinking,
> etc. It has what you are describing: a fixed vocabulary. In fact,
> #FIXED attributes from SGML were an early way to annotate this sort of
> thing. It was in fact, a DTD-less SGML browser.
>
> IOW, there are markup hypermedia browsers (at least one still
> standing) that do exactly what you are describing. They
> interleave a fixed application language into ANY markup
> including ones that already have
> their own semantics for links.
You may want to note that
> what xml:base
> does was done with entity declarations once upon a time
> before it became
> necessary to reinvent them. People such as me have jobs because like
> COBOL programmers, we know how those work (meaning I can read
> a DTD, edit in Notepad++ and program so I replace four
> slots/persons. Cheap!).
>
> >>That's exactly the problem. Build it into the language, problem
> >>disappears! Well ok, there may be other problems.
>
> Well, build it into a separate language and interleave it
> into the rest but we're quibbling syntax and legal/contract
> definitions on that one.
> Would you believe me if I told you all of this was discussed
> endlessly a decade and a half ago? HTML had the upper hand
> in that even though it had a crummy browser, it was free and
> it worked for the trivial tasks.
> Then with mountains of money and publicity, it became the
> kudzu of the information age. Now it takes its final
> evolutionary form as HTML5: it owns the parse.
Of course I would believe it, I was around but not really paying
attention (still a problem!). But, don't you mean the browser owns
the parse?
>
> And it will die rather more quickly than anyone suspects, but
> that is a prediction yet to be realized.
Maybe because MicroXML will replace it?
>
> >>XML may live on for 1000 or more years, if we make it.
> >>How many times can that markup be reinvented? And each
> time it gets
> >>reinvented is one more reason to not use XML.
>
> It won't exactly get reinvented. Mauled and rebranded is more
> likely. I believe, and John can correct me, MicroXML is a
> JSON competitor because it turns out XML is not the best
> solution to the problem it was touted to solve: bits on the
> wire. On the other hand, let's say Microsoft makes noise
> with its Javascript patent, then JSON doesn't look too
> healthy and that is precisely why markup if not XML was
> invented and why keeping it free of application layers is A
> Good Thing.
Holy Cow!
>
> Notice that the markup examples I gave above come from
> standards that predate the web by almost a decade. The DTD
> used for that is huge and bulky. Not important except to
> note that Internet Time and
> Inevitability proved to be yet another myth. All
> technologies that get
> widespread uptake develop like a wildfire until the uptake
> reaches some
> point of distribution and then switching costs take over.
> That is your
> main challenge in this proposal. Where the investments are
> fairly large, so are the switching costs.
I can see that. But at the same time, it could be amortized over a long,
long time, right, because not every application is going to start
using those hypermedia affordances on day 1.
>
> That is one reason I have a job. :) They can't afford to move on.
Ha! I can certainly see that. Next time you're in Ottawa, I owe you a beer!
>
> >>I'm on board with XSL! Why do you say was/?
>
> Some noises that the XSL-FO part of it may be deprecated as solutions
> converge around CSS on the web. That will be a problem for
> the world I
> work in that makes heavy use of XSL-FO with PDF. On the
> other hand, it is a tooling problem and we simply buy new
> tools, we don't sell them.
OK. Much as I liked XSL-FO, it didn't get the traction I thought it was going
to so I kind of stopped playing with it. But I always thought making maps
with SVG + XSL-FO was a pretty cool idea.
Trying to stay off the third rail,
Peter
- References:
- RE: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basicprinciples of MicroXML"
- From: "Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca>
- Re: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basicprinciples of MicroXML"
- From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com>
- RE: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basicprinciples of MicroXML"
- From: "Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca>
- Re: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basicprinciples of MicroXML"
- From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com>
- RE: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basicprinciples of MicroXML"
- From: "Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca>
- RE: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basicprinciples of MicroXML"
- From: David Lee <dlee@calldei.com>
- Re: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basic principlesof MicroXML"
- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- RE: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basic principles of MicroXML"
- From: "Len Bullard" <Len.Bullard@ses-i.com>
- RE: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basic principles of MicroXML"
- From: "Len Bullard" <Len.Bullard@ses-i.com>
- RE: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basicprinciples of MicroXML"
- From: "Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca>
- RE: [xml-dev] "Introducing MicroXML, Part 1: Explore the basic principles of MicroXML"
- From: "Len Bullard" <Len.Bullard@ses-i.com>
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]