Return-Path: Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org Received: (qmail 13955 invoked by uid 6000); 19 Dec 1997 14:43:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 13946 invoked from network); 19 Dec 1997 14:43:12 -0000 Received: from gate-isdn.ukweb.com (194.152.65.149) by taz.hyperreal.org with SMTP; 19 Dec 1997 14:43:12 -0000 Received: from (ecstasy.localnet) [192.168.2.4] by gate-isdn.ukweb.com with smtp (Exim 1.81 #1) id 0xj3dz-0007kC-00; Fri, 19 Dec 1997 14:43:15 +0000 Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 14:43:09 +0000 (GMT) From: Paul Sutton To: Apache Developers Subject: Re: SBNWire In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org On Thu, 18 Dec 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote: > On Thu, 18 Dec 1997, Gregory A Lundberg wrote: > > Now _this_ is scary. > > Ok, what's so scary about XML? It's not microsoft proprietary... or are > there political manouverings going on in the W3C that I'm oblivious to? Well they took it to make up CDF. I'm not sure if CDF is now going towards standard or not. > Companies getting on the XML bandwagon seems like the 1998 equivalent to > the 1996 rush to get on the html bandwagon... but I'd gladly be educated > otherwise :) Well, MS are developing a lot of client-side XML technology (mainly in the form of activeX controls stuff) to request/display/process data, so the more data is available in XML the more they can blur the distinction between the web (as a medium) and the MS operating systems, leading to a situation where you can only view data really well on ActiveX clients (i.e. windows). So while XML (and CDF) aren't by themselves worrying, they are being used to ease people into a microsoft lock-in at the client end. Not that that hasn't been happening already. Other examples from the browser area include the use of NT security protocols (which only work on Windows browsers against windows servers) instead of the digest auth, and activeX itself. //pcs