Hi Gregg... Well since you jumped in I couldn't resist responding. XML may not be good for human consumption but isn't intended to be. It really is designed to make data more machine readable ! XML gives contextual meaning to data, allowing (relatively) stupid machines to intepret and manipulate the data more easily. End users should never be exposed to XML, only the resulting presentation from XSLT transforms into something like HTML (presented in a browser space, of course), or into visual objects presented in something like Flash.
Comparing Rebol to XML is sort of like comparing Java to HTML. One is an action paradigm, the other is simply a markup paradigm. Rebol's dialecting may be neat but lets face it most people have never heard of it. Rebol is not likely to become an inter system standard anytime soon, anymore than Snobol is ever likely to become a popular language. My 2 cents. Michael -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Gregg Irwin Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 12:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [REBOL] Re: Google + SOAP Hi Michael, << So what's so complex about SOAP?? It's merely an envelope of XML written in XML. Am I missing something here? >> Speaking from a position of relative ignorance, to me, XML itself is unwieldy and not good for human consumption. SOAP just adds another layer on top of it, which is no more human friendly than the original, indeed, it *is* the original as you point out. REBOL's dialecting approach is, IMHO, about a zillion times better than XML and SOAP. Interoperability is the only reason to even worry about it. Just had to jump in. :) --Gregg -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes. -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
