XML history

From xml-dev, via Mike Champions blog, through to Jon Bosaks closing speech at XML 2006 (via Ricks feedback to Mike). Circuitous, but a good read! Here is the text of it (I'm guessing we've Dave Megginson to thank but I'm not sure. Couple of points made me think (or smile).

Tim Bray as showman? No? Maybe. I like his bit of theatricality though. Throwing the XML TR (27 pages) into the audience, and noting that 8879 would have taken out the first two rows! Nice one Tim.

The other point (basis for Ricks comment), that, quote

Furthermore (I was told), business users will never adopt a solution that depends on an additional XSLT pass because it would require them to learn something new

I found this made me shudder. It didn't particularly surprise me and Jons comments seemed quite appropriate. Kens solution is neat yet it is met with a real opposition which appears based on ... something quite unreasonable. I note the use of the term 'business systems' (not technology or software. I wonder at that. Does that make it harder to argue against? Jons solution made me chuckle. Bundle OSS implementation with the UBL spec. Politics at their best?

The quote that took my fancy most was this.

The lesson that apparently needs to be learned in the data-centric XML world is this: stability and preservation have always been central to the SGML/XML concept, but it's the data we're trying to preserve, not the software we might be using at the moment to process it.

For me that sums up the massive benefits that many of us are striving for in using XML. Tools will change. The value is in the data. I'll use the tools that do the job best, constrained by what I can afford. The investment is in the data!

The final quote made me sigh.

I was struck by how many of the issues troubling today's XML adopters are exactly the same ones we faced in the SGML days. For example, the choice between creating XML documents using unstructured style-driven word processors and creating them using native XML tools. As far as I can tell, our understanding of this problem has not changed an iota in the last ten years.

It took me a while to realise it was a people issue, hence not tractable using technology. Perhaps this is the year that this problem can be addressed?