XML *should* be boring

[Peter Murray-Rust]

At 10:54 11/09/98 -0400, David Megginson wrote:
[...]
>
>I wish that we could have prevented the hype in the first place, but
>that's all spilled milk now.  XML is a very important standard -- I
>think that it is roughly to information exchange what TCP and IP are
>to networking -- but it's still just a standard, not a product.

I respect this view - and I suggest we don't try to convert each other :-)
And keep posting contrary view to mine. But it could also be argued that
HTML was just a communication language for text, graphics and hyperlinks -
and not necessarily the best one. But the applications of HTML were
dramatic - and without them there wouldn't be an XML.

So if - at the technical level - XML is simply another protocol, what's it
for?

My own feeling is that structured documents and precise markup have an
immense amount to offer, in the same way as hypermedia did. They challenge
the way that people think and organise their information. I don't believe
that these ideas can and should be kept below the surface - I think they
should start moving into the general curriculum. So maybe XML is simply the
messenger, but the message is much more important.

	P.

Peter Murray-Rust, Director Virtual School of Molecular Sciences, domestic
net connection
VSMS http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/vsms, Virtual Hyperglossary
http://www.venus.co.uk/vhg

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)