[mso] Re: XML Conversation
- From: "Dian D. Chapman" <dian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <mso@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 13:08:01 -0600
And then you wonder why your posts commonly kill threads!<g, d&r>
Dian D. Chapman
Technical Consultant, Microsoft MVP
MOS Certified, Editor/TechTrax
Free MS Tutorials: http://www.mousetrax.com/techtrax
Free Word eBook: http://www.mousetrax.com/books.html
Optimize your business docs: http://www.mousetrax.com/consulting
Learn VBA the easy way: http://www.mousetrax.com/techcourses.html
-----Original Message-----
From: mso-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:mso-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Greg Chapman
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 12:07 PM
To: mso@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [mso] Re: XML Conversation
Thanks for moving the subject, Linda.
Steve,
I'm familiar with SGML and its children, X, HT, etc. They aren't new and
there are a lot of other things I work with based on the structural
guidelines that SGML provides. For example, a large part of LDAP
structures are implementations of SGML against the X.500 directory
guidelines (which, as a refresher, is a structure to provide objective
metadata (properties, methods) to things not normally considered an
object like a user account.)
Much of what XML was expected to be was implemented in a slightly
different way as Cascading Style Sheets. I have nothing against either.
I have everything against the following, though:
- data exchange bloat
- unnecessarily fixing schemas against a free-form medium
- instead of using binary data where appropriate, multiplying storage
and exchange throughput by a factor of 8 (minimum value)
- deprecating parts of the underlying specifications which provided the
utility by which the using audience was greatly increased
As a result of abusing the idea, we get databases created expressly in
string terms (increasing storage and CPU cycles for redundant string
parsing functions), server pools multiplied by 4 (to implement the XML
parse and 'business rule' logic in a way more naturally executed in
binary logic pools) and fewer people who may create the originally
intended linked pages to data. In such an environment, careless
implementation of parsers becomes critical and Microsoft shows an
absolutely horrid record for Interfacing its XML parsing libraries over
the last 6 years to the point that a change in its XML libraries often
forces a top to bottom rebuild of an application depending on those libs.
So now what I really expect to see is an open standard perverted to
protect proprietary data (which 'closes' more than it opens), increased
cost to deploy a web application, even less reliable connectivity to DB
systems and a HUGE increase in the amount of net traffic generated to
support the same results.
I'll admit to some little things, though. I have seen excellent examples
of XML usage. For example, the WSF file format supporting Windows Script
Host provides things never seen on an individual workstation in the
past... like the ability to use multiple languages in a single script
file and the specification of particular jobs within that script. I'll
also give applause to the idea that SOAP, another XML derivative, is a
marked improvement for scaling server pools than was raw DCOM and does,
to a limited degree, break the platform 'lock' we used to experience if
we wanted to implement non-similar server systems in a single web
application.
The part that really bunches my shorts, however, and a large part of my
displeasure with XML is that it contributes to an unnecessary technical
elitism. Because of this, the derivative CSS functions will be depriving
folks of simple use HMTL terms like "</u>" and table nesting because
those original techniques and support for them are now deprecated at the
request of the commercial interests and without adequate acceptance from
other communities.
So, if I got right down to it, XML itself ain't a bad thing. It's what I
see people doing with it which alarms me and piques my ire. Putting
Office into the mix is sure to make an even bigger mess of the whole
deal while Microsoft continues on its current path of adandoning past
work (and the work of its customers) in those environments. I don't mind
learning the new tools (although, if it's a productivity tool, why do we
force the creation of new 'experts' every few years?) but I do mind
watching technical investments obliterated with inadequate thought to
the investment the core has made in the technology.
Oh yeah, most of the time I'm really quite pleasant to work with!<g>
Greg
Linda F. Johnson wrote:
><<As we spin into OT hell ;-)
>
>(if
>Linda don't squash us both)>>
>
>Haha.....am I really that much of an ogre?
>
>Actually, since XML is a big part of Office 2003 and Office 2007, I'm
>letting this discussion continue. I'm also learning a lot and I hope others
>are too. But, please try to keep it in the context of Office and how it
>affects that. Please don't go wandering off into Vista land on me LOL
>
>But, I did change the subject line and I hope those of you who want to
>discuss XML will keep it in this thread so others who don't can just delete
>the posts. Thanks.
>
>
>Linda F. Johnson
>
>
*************************************************************
You are receiving this mail because you subscribed to mso@xxxxxxxxxxxxx or
MicrosoftOffice@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To send mail to the group, simply address it to mso@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To Unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
mso-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "unsubscribe" (without the quotes)
in the subject line.
Or, visit the group's homepage and use the dropdown menu. This will also
allow you to change your email settings to digest or vacation (no mail).
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/mso
To be able to use the files section for sharing files with the group, send a
request to mso-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxx and you will be sent an invitation
with instructions. Once you are a member of the files group, you can go
here to upload/download files:
http://www.smartgroups.com/vault/msofiles
*************************************************************
*************************************************************
You are receiving this mail because you subscribed to mso@xxxxxxxxxxxxx or
MicrosoftOffice@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To send mail to the group, simply address it to mso@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To Unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
mso-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "unsubscribe" (without the quotes) in
the subject line.
Or, visit the group's homepage and use the dropdown menu. This will also allow
you to change your email settings to digest or vacation (no mail).
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/mso
To be able to use the files section for sharing files with the group, send a
request to mso-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxx and you will be sent an invitation with
instructions. Once you are a member of the files group, you can go here to
upload/download files:
http://www.smartgroups.com/vault/msofiles
*************************************************************
- Follow-Ups:
- [mso] Re: XML Conversation
- From: Greg Chapman
- References:
- [mso] Re: XML Conversation
- From: Greg Chapman
Other related posts:
- [mso] Re: XML Conversation
- From: Greg Chapman
- [mso] Re: XML Conversation
- From: Greg Chapman