RE: Perspective: XML's ticking time bomb

["Faye Ly" <faye@pedestalnetworks.com>]

Weijing,

History tells us a 'simple' approach always warrants lower cost
development and thus always finds its way to deployment faster provided
that it still serves the purpose.  Let's make 'ease of implementation'
one of the goals!

-faye

-----Original Message-----
From: Chen, Weijing [mailto:wchen@tri.sbc.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 8:43 AM
To: 'Andy Bierman'
Cc: Xmlconf (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Perspective: XML's ticking time bomb


Andy: 
>> I think the problem is more complex than you describe. 
Any re-engineering effort has to be cost-justified or it won't happen. 
The overall reduction in operational cost has be greater than the
perceived cost of the re-engineering effort.  This is rarely true
for converting a solved problem from proprietary to standard technology.


It is indeed more complex than what I described as I simplified the case
a
bit.  The moral of story is that the complexity and cost of
re-engineering
pre-standard solution to standard solution must be reasonable enough to
justify the migration from both vendor and service provider aspects.
The
most of software cost is development and testing.  Therefore, simple to
implement and straightforward to test MUST have higher priority over
other
nice-to-have features such as processing efficiency, bandwidth
efficiency,
etc.  Hey, we have gigahertz processor, gigabits memory, and gigabit
network
everywhere (sort of).



Weijing

--
to unsubscribe send a message to xmlconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/xmlconf/>

--
to unsubscribe send a message to xmlconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/xmlconf/>