Raising this issue of English language tags is itself beating a dead horse. See a brilliant exposition entitled "English Language Tags," addressed to the ebXML Core Components Team on 31 Jan 2001, at http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-core/200101/msg00183.html.
And do the EDIFACT tags, like MEA or BEG, mean anything to anyone who can't make out English? Nevertheless, I'll add this "deficiency" of XML - as applied to interoperable B2B standards - to the list. William J. Kammerer Novannet Columbus, OH 43221-3859 â USA +1 (614) 487-0320 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Chessman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "EDI-L Mailing List" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, 04 February, 2005 12:34 PM Subject: RE: [EDI-L] The Ubiquity of XML - again. William, Move the dead horse aside. I'm now being misattributed and I'm very disappointed. No, I never claimed that XML was unsuitable. What I said, and clearly I'm happy to say it again, is the simple one-for-one substitution of XML for EDI (which amounts to nothing more than a syntax "regime change") does not derive any value. Sure you can *parse* XML using SAX or DOM. What you get is the XML data broken up into more digestible chunks, but there is no more meaning to the data than there is with the comparable EDI data. I've always been surprised that nobody's written a comparable EDI parser...that *parses* the EDI data. Then you'd get the EDI data stream in more digestible chunks, too. The fact that an industry does or does not use EDI or XML, frankly, has nothing to do with what I'm saying. My above statements are purely technical issues. Summary: one-to-one substitution of XML for EDI = no value add. Does this mean that new people in the arena shouldn't adopt XML? No...they'll probably get lots of great *new* uses out of it, just like you're trying to tell me. But if a shop is going to swap out EDI and replace it with XML to do *exactly*the*same*thing*, I return to my original query: what's the point? With respect to "readability", yes, even I can agree that "StreetName" is meaningful when it's within "Address" within "Party" within "BuyerParty" but those phrases are meaningful to me because I speak "English" (or at least the derivative known as "American"). Frankly, your example also disappoints me and leads me to two important points: 1) Programming languages don't understand English any better than they understand Portuguese, Russian, Greek or Mandarin Chinese. 2) I also agree (as I'm sure everyone else on this list does that "NomaDaRua" is meaningful when it's within "EndereÃo" within "Partido" within "PartidoDoComprador". Same would be true for "ÎÎÎÎÎÎÎÏÎ" within "ÎÎÎÏÎÏÎÏÎ" within "ÎÏÎÎÎÎÎÏÎÎÎÎÎÎÏÎÏ" within "ÎÏÎÎÎÎÎÏÎÎÎÎÎÎÏÎÏÎÎÎÏÎÏÏÏÎ". But at least I'll be able to get those values through my SAX parser. Am I saying "XML bad, EDI good?" Not on your tintype. Respectfully, Bill Chessman Inovisâ P.S., Much as I respect your ability to do COBOL...Dude, it's the 21st century. 8-) . Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC> Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
