RE: Is XML getting too hard? (was: Re: More on Namespaces...

Dean Roddey (roddey@us.ibm.com)
Thu, 20 Aug 1998 14:26:16 -0400


>True - but does anyone else need that stuff either? Okay, that's goin=
g too
>far. But does everyone else need it? I don't think so. This train is=
moving
>too fast, and apparently has no brakes. I never thought I'd complain =
about
>standards moving too _quickly_, but XML seems to be breaking new groun=
d in
>many different ways.

And what are the odds of getting any real compliance and interoperabili=
ty with
so many specs
moving in so many directions so quickly? The odds of two tools being at=
the
same 'XML Place' at
the same 'XML Time' is probably pretty low if they weren't written by t=
he same
person.

But isn't this the way it always works? Non-programmers get frustrated =
and
decide to create
something of their own. Then, if it catches on, it has to be expanded t=
o be
able to do everything the
old system could do, by which time it is too complex and then non-progr=
ammers
get frustrated
and decide to create something of their own?

At some point you have a programming language and could have just used =
one to
begin with, and
left the other tool alone to stake out the low ground. I'm reading a co=
uple
hours a day and I still feel like
I only barely understand the most basic issues, and I'm a hard core *C+=
+*
programmer. I think that
the inability of a hard core C++ programmer to understand some other la=
nguage
could be a legal
definition of 'too dang complicated' :-)

Just my opinion of course...

----------------------------------------
Dean Roddey
Software Weenie
IBM Center for Java Technology - Silicon Valley
roddey@us.ibm.com
=