• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Re: The Airplane Example vs XML 2.0 with data-typing
• From: david.lyon@c...
• Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 08:10:25 +1100
• In-reply-to: <1104938575.4359.267.camel@borgia>
• References: <1104886621.4359.241.camel@borgia> <32878.68.242.36.87.1104909093.squirrel@68.242.36.87> <1104914813.41dba97da394a@65.39.203.11> <1104938575.4359.267.camel@borgia>
• User-agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.6

Quoting Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>:

> On Wed, 2005-01-05 at 19:46 +1100, david.lyon@c... wrote:
> > The fact is that in most medium sized enterprises, XML gets overlooked
> > largely for the reason that it's data type support is sub-standard for
> > any serious business use.
>
> Do you have any evidence to back this "fact"?  Certainly it's not my
> experience.  Enterprises didn't bounce the Web because it has "sub
> standard data types support".  In my experience semi-structured data
> sets are an unqualified business support, as demonstrated by how
> hurriedly the RDBMS vendors rushed to build in BLOB support when the Web
> started to explode.

Well I'm not a historian, I just work in the present.

Obviously you have way more experience in old systems and techniques than
I do, so we can leave it at that.




----------------------------------------------------------------

• References:
  • RE: The Airplane Example (was Re: StreamingXML)
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>
  • RE: The Airplane Example (was Re: StreamingXML)
    • From: hhalpin@i...
  • The Airplane Example vs XML 2.0 with data-typing
    • From: david.lyon@c...
  • Re: The Airplane Example vs XML 2.0 with data-typing
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: SAXException, checked, buy why?
• Next by Date: Re: The Airplane Example (static typing permathread?)
• Previous by thread: Re: The Airplane Example vs XML 2.0 with data-typing
• Next by thread: RE: The Airplane Example (was Re: StreamingXML)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread