| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
xml
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sunday, July 14, 2002Aaron Crane: Why XML is technologically terrible, but you have to use it anyway. Largely because everybody is doing it (and besides it's not that terrible).
Posted to xml @ 11:26:19 PM ( comments)
Steve Pepper: The TAO of Topic Maps. "The generality and expressive power of the topic map model bring with it other advantages that go far beyond those traditionally associated with indexes. The close similarity to semantic nets gives an idea of how topic maps, even without any occurrences connecting them to an information pool, can become valuable resources in their own right. This in turn opens up new business opportunities for creating and selling “portable topic maps” that can be overlaid on multiple information pools. For traditional commercial publishers, producing well-crafted topic maps could be a new way of leveraging their existing knowledge and experience and combating the threat to their existence posed by the vast amounts of information now available for free." [Curiouser and curiouser!] Posted to klogs, xml @ 10:47:15 PM ( comments)
Word 11, XML, and the universal canvas. "The endgame is what Microsoft has called the universal canvas. In the long run, that means migrating software to a common storage model. That won't happen any time soon, but there's a big near-term opportunity to leverage XML as an exchange format much more aggressively. I'd like to see that happen across the suite of Microsoft's clients by the time Office 11 ships. I'm not holding my breath, though." [Jon's Radio] Me neither. Although I'd like it to happen across many different apps and clients. Posted to xml @ 4:27:32 PM ( comments)
Updated 8/22/2002; 5:32:45 PM
