Peter Hunsberger wrote:
> The one place I still see a need for such types of XML is when you're
> doing cross domain integration and signatures, encryption,
> authentication, etc. become part of the exchange process. JSON
> doesn't seem to have all the pieces lined up to push XML (SOAP or
> otherwise) out of this space (yet)?
That's an excellent point, especially on the data interchange front.
Much of that infrastructure is tightly bound to XML as well, so isn't
easily replaced.
> There's a lot of capability that has been built around XML that still
> needs to be replicated in the other spaces so I think it would be
> premature to declare any kind of overwhelming trend. At this point I
> perceive what is going on as more as people reacting to the flaws in
> the current XML world and testing out alternate strategies to see if
> they do any better. Whether these alternate strategies will, in the
> long run, grow to have as many capabilities (and flaws) as XML remains
> to be seen?
Fair enough. I think another way of putting it is that XML is slowly
losing its status as the default format in fields where it once seemed
(rightly or wrongly) the obvious answer.
--
Simon St.Laurent
http://simonstl.com/
