RE: XML - where's the beef?

[Darren Barefoot <Darren -dot- Barefoot -at- capeclear -dot- com>]

My two cents:

Despite XML's origins in publishing, I really don't see technical
communication or, in fact, human-readable material in general, as the
appealing feature of XML-based technologies. As we know, XML is basically a
meta-language used to create languages that describe content. Given its
simplicity and ubiquity, this is pretty big news for computers talking to
other computers. However, in practical terms, I don't really see a lot of
documentation departments implementing this technology anytime soon.

Let's be honest...how many people have the time to add an additional layer
of meaning to the content they generate? My team certainly doesn't. Sure, it
would be nifty to generate many formats (customized PDFs, HTML files, etc)
from XML documents using XSLT and the like, but the writer still needs to
tell the XML document which bits are <overview> or <installation procedure>
or whatever.

Currently any of the decent XML authoring and documentation management
systems are really expensive. I could see people with a really big document
store (governments, large corporations) benefiting from these tools, but the
start-up costs in terms of resources would probably be pretty enormous.
Unless they've been using SGML and have some nifty conversion tools,
converting a document archive would be pretty heinous.

As for browsers, what's wrong with IE? It seems to display XML just fine.
However, unless you're passing your XML documents to a computer (a Web
service, an XLST processor, whatever), your audience won't want to look at
plain old XML. Plain old XML looks like this:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<purchaseOrder>
    <comment/>
    <shipTo country="US">
        <name>Joe Bloggs</name>
        <street>2121 North California Boulevard</street>
        <city>Walnut Creek</city>
        <state>CA</state>
        <zip>94596</zip>
    </shipTo>
    <items>
        <item partNum="1-0392-2">
            <productName>CapeStudio</productName>
            <quantity>50</quantity>
            <USPrice>1000</USPrice>
        </item>
    </items>
</purchaseOrder>

It will have to be transformed into something readable (such as HTML) before
it's useful to the end user. So, I don't really think browser technology is
an issue.

I hate to be a purist, but may I recommend Notepad for making XML, at least
to start? This enables a deep understanding of the language.

Interestingly, I just spell-checked this email in Outlook. It returned "XML"
as a misspelled word. That's indicative of something, don't you think?

That's all I got. DB.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: KMcLauchlan -at- chrysalis-its -dot- com

<big snip>

> Who is using what to *make* XML?
> What *are* you making with it?
> And, what browser/reader do you expect your 
> audience to use?
> 
> Are those that DO work in XML simply using it 
> as an intermediary step, that nobody ever actually 
> sees? You haul your documents through further 
> conversion, to make print or PDFs or HTML pages?
> Does XML get read/viewed and appreciated in its 
> own right, anywhere?  Where would that be?
> I don't hear people touting an "XML-reader" 
> equivalent of Acrobat Reader. 

<more snipping>

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available now at http://www.devahelp.com or info -at- devahelp -dot- com

Sponsored by Information Mapping, Inc., a professional services firm
specializing in Knowledge Management and e-content solutions. See
http://www.infomap.com or 800-463-6627 for more about our solutions.

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.