>>Any platform can read a text file, no matter how the contents of it is formatted.

true. but wouldn't it be great if there was a standard cross platform API for validating and querying such data from applications?

>>XML in itself have absolutely no advantage to say a csv-file,

see above.

>>it is the fact that it has become a de-facto standard that makes

>>people choose xml over any other formatting.

You say that like it's not important --- it is the absolute clincher. HTML may not be perfect, but simply by gaining a critical mass of support it has completely revolutionised one type of client-server application (publishing for human readers). At it's simplest level XML can be seen as an attempt to standardise (edit) an interface onto (/edit) CSV files. This is an essential foundation on which we can build higher level standards of inter-computer messaging.

Add to that the fact that, with XSL-T, a new generation of developers are considering the benefits of functional programming and I think it's worth standing up for 🙂

>>what he is really saying in this article (especially since it is actually published at a SQL

>> Server specific site) is that xml has no place inside SQL Server.

Well, half the article is a (very flawed, in my opinion) attack on XML in the large. Only in the second half does it home in on SQL Server. I don't see anyone in this thread supporting the idea of storing data as native XML within an RDBMS -- and to be honest, I've never heard of support for this made anywhere else.

However, outputting query results direct to XML seems very sensible and it's something I use often. I think all the major vendors now support it -- to a certain extent this maybe just bandwagonning, but as Frank says, time will tell.

Edited by - planet115 on 10/07/2003 05:43:53 AM