XML like JAVA, not HTML... was: XML *should* be boring

[Bill la Forge]

>Support for generic XML, with tools widely available for editing /
>authoring / viewing / exchanging / storing / searching / objectizing /
>developing XML might stand a chance of making sure that XML doesn't stay in
>the high-end expensive small-community world that SGML inhabits today.
>Enlarging the community of developers is a critical step toward making XML
>cheap and ubiquitous.


I've been thinking that Java may be a better model than HTML for XML.

XML is first a tool for the programming community and later an information
transport like HTTP.

The XML market will be for tools. Later we will need the supporting products
to deal with it as a transport.

I see DOM and SAX as important first steps. The tools are things like DOM
diff (not XML diff), DOM to SAX, Visible Elements (like Visible Java Beans),
code generators for self-validating elements, etc.

I suspect that the reason for XML's current slump in momentum is because of
linear thinking--we need to think around the curve on this one and move past
syntax to semantics.

Yes, I'm speaking here from my coins bias. But I believe it is the direction
we need to develop if we want to realize the XML vision.

If we can support a standard framework for services, we can develop a
component-based approach to products. Then see how fast this whole thing
takes off!

Bill
http://www.jxml.com



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)