DeRobertis: Why would we want XML?
Alain: While it is always hazardous to predict what is
going to happen, I am nonetheless sure that XML is the
future of the Web. Content will no longer be limited
to strings of chars. With XML, Web content will be
marked up semantically. No more searches that turn up
1 million hits, 99.99999% of which is totally
irrelevant. On a global scale, XML will facilitate the
work of Web bots for indexing and searching, and, on a
local level, it will facilitate knowledge engineering.
DeRobertis: What advantages does XML offer?
Alain: It's a standard. It's extensible. It will
vastly improve the Web and other knowledge-oriented
work too (above). It's accessible even with a lowly
text editor, or from any programming language that can
handle text (e.g. any language whatsoever).
DeRobertis: What advantage does an export to XML
offer?
Alain: See above. But it also occurs to me that, in
some cases, XML might be preferred over binaries for
SECURITY reasons. Binaries are executable while
text-based XML is not (unless I am mistaken). A lot of
commercial servers will not accept the transfer of
binaries; only text and graphics.
DeRobertis: The ability to use a text editor to f-up
your stacks? Do actually intend to edit your stacks by
hand with all the thousands of lines of machine
generated garbage to deal with? And manage not to make
a single mistake, like creating duplicate or invalid
part numbers or ID's?
Alain: Or with some automated text-editing tools, like
a programming language for example.
DeRobertis: The graphical HTML editors produce code
that is bloated, and don't let you do everything you
should be able to do with HTML -- at least not easily.
Alain: You are absolutely right on this count,
Anthony. That's why I hardly ever work with graphical
markup tools, despite the fact that they have been
vastly improved. I sometimes use DreamWeaver to
PROTOTYPE some DHTML stuff, then I rework the
underlying code with BBEdit and some programming.
DeRobertis: But do we intend to bark up the same tree,
and create a format so complex as that even our own
code can't edit it?
Alain: No. The block file format was adopted long ago.
The XML and/or XCML initiative(s) are distinct from
the OpenKard Interpreter and so on.
DeRobertis: One might argue that XML allows other
people to use our format and create their own viewers
& editors, but--um--coudn't the just use the binary
format, since it's public?
Alain: Is the GUI of OpenKard currently available in
the form of binaries? If not, when do you believe
that they will be? My guess is that we are months
away from this time. In the meantime, and in a matter
of days, we could export stacks to XML and use a
scripting language to rapidly prototype the GUI. Only
the concept of the GUI, of course, not its
implementation.
DeRobertis: Is this some great percentage of the press
and public, posessed with buzzwords, driving this
technically meritless trend?
Alain: XML will not replace the block file format, but
it is definitely not a meritless trend.
DeRobertis: Have I missed some great enlightenment?
Alain: Technologies are difficult to predict!
=====
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
