Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Sun & Microsoft Square Off With XML Standards

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the battle-of-the-megagiants dept.

Chris Gardner writes "ZDNet has an interesting and informative article on the upcoming battle between XML standards proposed by Sun and Microsoft. Microsoft's standards lie at the heart of their .NET initiative."

7 of 173 comments (clear)

  1. URL to Apache Open Source XML Software by goingware · · Score: 5
    Here's where you can get lots of open source XML software:

    I've used the Xerces-C library (it's actually C++) in a consumer GUI product whose user documents were XML files, and I think it's just great - it builds on many platforms. A wrapper allows Xerces-C to be used from Perl. Xerces-J has a similar API (DOM and SAX) but is written in Java. They have stuff for XSLT, Scalable Vector Graphics, Soap and so on.

    So you really don't need to buy into someone's proprietary platform, use the source luke.


    Michael D. Crawford
    GoingWare Inc

    --
    -- Could you use my software consulting serv
  2. BizTalk XML sample by Delirium+Tremens · · Score: 5

    <?xml version="5.00.2195" encoding="Office0.9"?>

    <!DOCTYPE biz-talk PUBLIC '-//Microsoft//DTD BizTalk//EN' 'http://microsoft.com/biztalk.dtd'>

    <BiztalkMessage>
    DCOM:rtgedf-k87fh7364h384753oj5-387j4io53j453ooko4
    87979654-s4-dfs4453534676567-34535fds45t54hhhghhgh
    987958cs-gbf5t0-er345-fgdfg5-5jhjfhj-ew4-4sdsf4-ww
    89d8f7-98lkj3j-3234-sefs-435534aflk9rtew-wtgdsrgfr
    </BiztalkMessage>

  3. Re:Sun don't have a hope. by overshoot · · Score: 5

    This is just the real world - as long as MS's standards are open and not proprietry I have no particular problem with it.

    Too bad, then, that MS has declared that they intend to use XML as a container for proprietary (read 'closed') data formats. We suspected this for some time, but in a recent interview Ballmer came right out and said so.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  4. Re:XML standards? What about the other stuff? by macpeep · · Score: 4

    What does HTML and the web have to do with XML? XML is used on the server for data markup. It is then processed and stored in databases, sent to other servers, or transformed into something displayable, like HTML. XML is not something you will have on a web page like a Java applet or a MIDI tune. To do the data crunching and processing, you use an XML parser with DOM or XSL transformations. It's needed because SGML was too loose of a specification to be practical. XML defines a set of easy to implement rules about how documents are built, how DTD's for the document types are described etc.

    Now here's something for you to disagree with: XHTML should replace HTML as soon as possible so that we can get rid of the horrible beast! Hopefully IE5.5 and Mozilla and WAP 2.0 will make the transition faster.

  5. good article detailing the matter by zzzeek · · Score: 4

    http://www.sdtimes.com/news/015/story1.htm

  6. This is not about XML!! by macpeep · · Score: 5

    This is not about XML! It's about BizTalk vs. Sun's e-business XML language. Nobody has any problems agreeing upon what XML is and how it works. The whole point of XML is to create new languages - hence eXtensible.

    Besides, to those who bash Microsoft for embracing and extending others standards, it's worth nothing who wrote the original XML spec:

    Editors:
    Tim Bray, Textuality and Netscape
    Jean Paoli, Microsoft
    C. M. Sperberg-McQueen, University of Illinois at Chicago and Text Encoding Initiative
    Eve Maler, Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Second Edition

    It's just as much Microsoft's standard as it is Sun's and Netscape's and if anyone is going all out for XML, it's Microsoft. Which is not to say that Sun wouldn't be going all out for it; just take a look at java.sun.com today!

  7. The point where I lost respect by Sludge · · Score: 4
    The only real alternative to BizTalk is, ebXML and it's lame. It's just Sun and a bunch of bureaucrats backing it.

    It's this sort of quote that really makes me lose respect for the articles. Calling something 'lame' in a tech article does not suffice, except when herding lower IQ types into opposing a technology and chuckling at the misfortunes of another.