We had nice discussion in the class on XML, and its advantages and weakness. There are different opinions about XML and I was a bit surprised when Phil showed that a search on "Why XML Sucks" returns many results.
The debate is not just in this class. It's just a miniature of the outside world. Here are two recent blogs (right after our session on XML) on this issue:
"XML on the wane? Say it isn't so, Jack" http://blogs.zdnet.com/service-oriented/?p=2986
"What's the future of XML?" http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/soa-talk/whats-the-future-of-xml/
Google Gears Dead?
-
For those that don't know what Google Gears does the below is from Google'
Site:
Gears is a plug-in that extends your browser to create a richer platform
...
14 years ago
Posts
Some things I didn't mention before.
ReplyDeleteYAML is popular in the Ruby world
http://www.yaml.org/start.html
There are enough converters out there to go from one format to another. It is harder to go from XML -> Something else, than it is to go from YAML/JSON -> XML. This is because of all those unnecessary features that XML comes packed with.
Secondly, if things need to be readable, XML isn't the solution either. While, I could go argue that YAML is so much easier to read... I'm better off mentioning DSLs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain-specific_language
Domain Specific Languages are becoming so much easier to create, and read.
Once again, I refer to ruby land.
http://jroller.com/rolsen/entry/building_a_dsl_in_ruby
http://jroller.com/rolsen/entry/building_a_dsl_in_ruby1
And I refer to a specific example that I use that has gained tons of steam (once again, in ruby land), except this time, the DSL was meant to sound like English... and more specifically, the English that Analysts would use to create User Stories... (If you use the DSL properly, this english is translated DIRECTLY into a test suite)
http://cukes.info/
As for using XML in SOA I would tend to agree that it is on the way out. But I do think that XML will stick around for document and configuration formatting.
ReplyDeleteI would tend to agree that XML is on the way out as far as in use for SOA. But I think XML will be around for a while since it is good for document and configuration formatting.
ReplyDeleteXML is still very widely used and will be around a long time. I agree with Jon that it provides a good option for parsing documents.
ReplyDeleteI guess whether it is EDI or XML or JSON or IIOP, choosing of them depends on the case/situation and also the cost that we want to spend for these. I believe that this is the reason that all these old technologies are still existing in par with the new ones.....Everything has its own purpose though coupled with new technologies....
ReplyDeleteXML is going to stay, not only because it is useful, but it has a large user base..
ReplyDeleteYAML distinguishes itself from XML by being Data oriented rather than document-markup..
YAML is purely a data representation language and thus has no executable commands. This means that parsers should be safe to apply to tainted data without fear of a latent command-injection security hole. For example, because JSON is native "JavaScript" it is tempting to use the JavaScript interpreter itself to evaluate the data structure into existence, leading to command injection holes when inadequately verified.
However, YAML looses this advantage by allowing language specific tags so that arbitrary local objects can be created by a parser that supports those tags. Any YAML parser that allows sophisticated object instantiation to be executed opens the potential for an injection attack. I am stating it on the basis of PyYAML documentation..
While XML have International Standard for security and is scrutinized by W3C organizations and teams.. I personally feel Security is a significant matter and player in deciding XML's fate..
I have seen JSON replacing situations where xml would have been. One of the major reasons being the smaller size as both are similar solutions, being text based and well documented.
ReplyDeleteAs JSON is gaining momentum, I see one major factor that may kill JSON while XML may live on in the long run. That major factor is the coupling with Javascript. Languages come and go and despite the wide use of javascript, it is a language and is doom to the same fate as all it predecessors. All languages become obsolete. In the rare case the language lives on it evolves to become something different.
ya... As jimmy said, we need to make an important note that...javascript reserves its place and significance always coupled with other languages.....And all the other languages, they just evolve and continue to exist.
ReplyDelete@mike
ReplyDeletexml still being a good option for parsing i really do not agree with this . I am using xstream to parse various xml files , i used dom and also sax. xstream provides the fastest way serialize,deserialise. and i also found that using xstreamon json is much more convincing thn using it on xml. json is surely more simpler to parse.
dooms: what I was trying to say, but probably misstated, is that XML documents are very easy to parse with technologies like Perl.
ReplyDeleteAll I'm saying is that a lot of people still use XML, so sometimes you have no choice but to work with it. There are a lot of benefits, and negatives, to XML, but it's not a bad way to present documents at all, in my opinion. Like anything, it has its place, and is misused often.
Michael's assessment is accurate in that you can only "swim upstream" for so long. XML's pervasive use dictates a certain baseline acceptance that it will be perpetuated for the foreseeable future.
ReplyDeleteAs new alternatives evolve, it will ultimately be replaced, but until then you will only limit yourself by avoiding XML.
I also agree there is tremendous "scope creep" when it comes to XML, but it does not negate the benefit, when properly used.