Home -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: XML: The good, the bad, and the ugly

Re: XML: The good, the bad, and the ugly

From: Dawn M. Wolthuis <dwolt_at_tincat-group.comREMOVE>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 18:12:55 -0500
Message-ID: <cjsldr$vui$1_at_news.netins.net> 





"Lemming" <thiswillbounce_at_bumblbee.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:60e3m0l1q69rp04b5o5iasso8d5pnuc525_at_4ax.com...




> On 4 Oct 2004 13:39:19 -0700, gnuoytr_at_rcn.com (robert) wrote:


>

> >as historical perspective, xml as B2B (and to a lesser extent B2C)

> >implementation of data transport,

>

> Please forgive my ignorance: what is B2B (or even B2C?)?

>

> >arose from the assertion (not true from

> >actual experience, i suspect) that using the xml plumbing (parser, https,

> >vpn, etc) would be cheaper and easier than existing EDI implmentations

> >which, IIRC, are binary data streams over VAN/WAN.  it wasn't that xml

> >was even a better bullet, let alone a magic one.

>

> ISTM it's not even a bullet.  It's a software recruitment agency's wet

> dream.  It has nothing to do with writing robust systems, and

> everything to do with having a shiny new buzzword with which to dazzle

> prospective clients.  Not exactly worthless, but nothing we haven't

> seen before.  In short: a lot of fuss about nothing.

>

> Hmm ... perhaps XML is about to become my equivalent of Dawn's 1NF.




Then I'll give you one little tip.  You need to know XML inside and out
before you make these claims.  Some of what you have said I'd agree with,
but some of it seems more like hot air.



While the format of XML is tagged data, with metadata tags instead of some
other delimiters (such as commas) and therefore "nothing we haven't seen
before", and as a bulky payload it seems like an unnecessary hit on
performance, web services are another story.  Web services that are built on
top of the XML format provide a means for one company to provide software
services that another company can use (including remote procedure calls)
without either company sharing any information about the tools they use to
do the work, other than the XML structures as the API.



Whether we think it a silly, ignorant, or brilliant approach, it is
definitely part of an approach that is going to lead to something decidedly
new and useful.  As such it is not just a "shiny new buzzword".   If you
don't like XML, then you might want to pick an alternative.  Jini services
using Java objects might be a better approach, for example, but there does
need to be an approach.



XML isn't brain surgery, but it is likely to make a significant impact that
really does advance the state of B2B software (although I would choose Jini
services for any department-to-department services within a company and
ditch the bulky XML).



Just my $.02.  Oh, and by the way, did I mention that XML has one thing
going for it -- it is not trapped into that silly 1NF rule that has no basis
in the mathematics of relations.  Cheers!  --dawn



> Lemming


> -- 

> Curiosity *may* have killed Schrodinger's cat.

Received on Tue Oct 05 2004 - 01:12:55 CEST












Original text of this message