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

From
Kent Tegels <>
To
"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <>
Date
2005-06-01T16:26:13Z
ID
<>
Thread
Re: [xml-dev] Why XML for Messaging?
> 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