Press Release

Didier PH Martin martind at
Wed May 26 23:33:56 BST 1999

Hi Carl,

Carl said:
I don't understand why BizTalk was created. To me, this looks like
a reinvention of email, but using XML tags and proprietary naming
systems instead of RFC-822 and MIME headers, and the Internet
DNS system for message exchange naming and routing.

Rather than use a scheme incompatible with existing messaging
systems, the IETF-EDI approach to utilizing existing Internet
standards to exchange XML messages with signatures and
receipts. BizTalk should be standardizing the message content (or
really standardizing the way to _document_ the message
definitions), not defining a new incompatible messaging

Didier say:
Maybe I missed something after two readings of the documents. Where did you
saw that? Is the <route> tag that makes you say that? It is not for external
communication but for internal communication. Like they explain on an other
document, external communication is through SMTP, HTPP, HTTPS all IETF RFCs.
They say that the <route> element is optional. This could be used for inter
departmental exchange (socket to socket). This could be used also to keep
all workflow information that other protocols like SMTP do not include.

Now, is the <route> element sufficient for workflow or inter-departmental

Note: I don't give a dam that Microsoft created Biztalk but If there is some
good ideas why not use them and not necessarily with Microsoft software.
Sometime, some posts reminds me of dark ages and narrow minds. Sorry Carl,
Its only that this week the density of idiocy has skyrocket in this list.
Where are the sharp minds? Where are the colleagues who can criticize with
good arguments (not cheap Microsoft is this or that...) Where are the folks
who are still curious? Please don't tell me they are gone all in utopia.

Take two:
What do you find wrong with the optional <route> tag (please make the doctor
advice against allergic reactions - forget Microsoft did it - imagine that
somebody else came with that paper). Do you have a better schema to encode
workflow? maybe you have a better idea. If yes, please share it with us -
poor fellows with instable curiosity ( a specie determined for extinction it

Didier PH Martin
mailto:martind at

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as: and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list