11/2/10 Reading Notes for Week 9
XML Articles
The pages defining various terms and acronyms used to qualify SML standards are especially helpful. Additionally, the tutorials and other resources offer excellent hands-on opportunities and references. However, since the articles are more than 6 years old, I wonder how much of it is still relevant. For example, RELAX NG has probably evolved a lot since this article was written. Or perhaps one of the other schema languages (Schemation, DTD, WXS) has become the industry standard.?
I enjoyed the Bergholz Tutorial article, especially because of its format and clarity. Its clear presentation of facts was easy to understand. Similar to last week’s tutorial, the XML Schema Tutorial pulled together the information in the three articles.
Hi Michele. I usually look at the dates on the articles we are given, but I realize that i hadn't this time. I thought these were relatively recent. Now you have me wondering if there is another language we should be learning.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the Bergholz tutorial was the easiest to understand. It was the best of the articles for people unfamiliar with XML.
Good catch on the dates of the articles! I just blindly read them all and didn't pay even the slightest bit of attention to when they were published! I actually preferred the Bryan article, which is from 1997...yikes.
ReplyDeleteHey Michelle,
ReplyDeleteI never thought about the date of the articles until I read your blog. I agree with you that maybe some of the information is outdated since technology constantly evolves and changes. I also wonder how much longer these versions will be around (if they are still used today.) As for the tutorial, I thought it did a pretty good job of tying the other articles together. However, I must admit that some of the information threw me off, and I had trouble getting through the tutorial.
The date of the articles were surprising to me, too. Since technology seems to change constantly it is interesting that something has seemed to either stay constant or relevant for the past 13+ years!
ReplyDeleteVery interesting points about the dates of the articles! I wonder if this suggests that these technologies take quite a long time to be widely recognized and accepted and recommended by the World Wide Web Consortium. It wouldn't surprise me if this process involves many of the same politics and obstacles that other issues involve!
ReplyDeleteWow, you are way more observant than I am. I also missed the dates on the articles. I also found that the same article more understandable, since it was written much more clearly.
ReplyDelete