|
XML is a standard for a standard. XML represents the means for data exchange among parties who have agreed on a common data architecture, and many potential XML users, though they performs similar functions and would sorely like to exchange data (I'm thinking of government), do not yet have a common data architecture. To use XML then, such customers need to form a standards body, define a common data dictionary and schemas, and purchase mainstream tools which can validate input against their arbitrary schemas.
There's a chicken and egg problem. Until those industry standards have been defined such that vendors can easily program for that market, vendors hold off. Individual players usually cannot define the standards themselves, and have little track record of cooperation. Scarce money also makes them timid; let someone else define the standard, then we'll use it as soon as a major vendor makes it easy for us.
This might cause a lull in the book market. Developers already either have their XML books or look online, and beginners may be waiting for mainstream tools such as Office 2003 (in addition to the definition of standards). I'll bet that books on Dreamweaver outsell books on HTML these days. One downside to the idea of Office 2003 being the mainstream tool that popularizes the use of XML is that Office 2003 will probably have slow uptake because money is tight.
|
Previous Message
Up
