> Date:    Sat, 12 Feb 2000 00:45:31 -0500
> From:    Mark Wonsil <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: HP Mention XML on the 3000
>
> I have not used it, but it appears to be based on Expat written by Jim
> Clark.  This parser is the one used in the open source Netscape browser.
> This page mentions that this parser is DOM-Like and SAX-like.  Does that
> mean it is "like - standard"?

Oh! Oh! I know the answer to this one :).

The reason this parser is DOM-like and SAX-like is because it is written in
C.  Both SAX and DOM were designed for O-O languages and make use of some
O-O constructs (like inheritance).  The parser therefore cannot fully
implement these interfaces.  It has equivalent functionality however.


> Date:    Sun, 13 Feb 2000 11:10:01 -0500
> From:    Richard Gambrell <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: HP Mention XML on the 3000
>
> Ok, so far as my understanding goes (and I could be quite wrong) XML is
> EDI reborn with what looks like a simpler structure.  Like EDI, what or
> who will create standards for exchange of data?  Is there reason to think
> the XML effort will go any further than EDI?

I think what sets XML apart from EDI is two-fold.  One, it's far more
readable than an EDI transaction.  If you know your problem space, then you
can probably pick up an XML file and figure out how to use most of it
without documentation.  This makes it far easier to use and debug.  The
second thing that sets it apart is the availability of free tools.  If you
want to get into EDI you need to purchase some very expensive software for
reading EDI transactions.  A much more extensive list of benefits can be
found at www.xmledi.com.

P.S.  XML is more than EDI.  EDI is a very small subset in the XML
application space.  One problem that XML does have (which it shares with
EDI) is the lack of standardized schemas.  Like EDI, XML may be doomed to
suffer from too many people trying to talk in their own way to everyone else
(the tower of Babel scenario).  OTOH, co-operation is so much easier today
because communication is so much easier today.  With tools like email and
the web, it is much harder to justify building something new when something
adequate to the task is already available.

Rob