Re: A good argument for XML

From: Gene Wirchenko <>
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 09:34:23 -0700
Message-ID: <>

On Fri, 01 Jul 2005 08:35:00 -0400, Tom Bradford <bradford653_at_REVERSE-THIS.moc.oohay> wrote:

>Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>> XML is an alleged solution looking for a problem.
>This is a '1997' argument whose validity is no longer acceptibly spoken
>as such a generalization.

     No, this is an argument that I just made. It is 2005.

>The W3C has been more than happy to synthesize the problems for us
>through the introduction of XML dependencies... RDF, SVG, XHTML, et al.
> The problems are here, welcome or not. Beyond that, there have
>definitely been problems to which XML is an ideal solution. Mixed
>content is a major one. Parts explosion is another.

     The problem has been solved before. XML is solving old problems.

>There have been many who have argued that the relational model is
>all-encompassing, and that is definitely true. But just because you
>'can' do something with a particular solution, it doesn't necessarily
>mean that you 'should' do something with a particular solution, or even
>that the solution is ideal in all cases.

     And just because you can come up with an alternative does not make that alternative the end-all and be-all. That is the way the XML pushers push though.


Gene Wirchenko Received on Fri Jul 01 2005 - 18:34:23 CEST

Original text of this message