MicroXML: The future of XML?
July 5, 2012 —
(Page 3 of 3)
Related Search Term(s): MicroXML, W3C, XML
“I do not think XML is sufficiently complex to warrant a new language,” van Kesteren continued.
In his blog, Ogbuji admitted that “MicroXML has no official standing in any recognized standards organization, but it is of great interest to XML developers for several reasons. John Cowan has already developed MicroLark—a Java implementation—and I developed one for Python.”
Ogbuji insisted that there is a great deal of interest in the MicroXML specification. “Remember, many of the most important modern specs, such as JSON and Markdown, had similarly informal roots,” he said.
To gain validity and more interest, Cowan suggested to the World Wide Web Consortium’s XML Core Working Group (of which he is a member) that they consider MicroXML, but there was insufficient interest, he said. Instead, he added, the group suggested a community group be created. They are much more informal than working groups, but that has not yet happened either, he said.
Ian Jacobs, head of W3C communications, said, “To my knowledge, MicroXML is not currently on the W3C agenda—although some of the people involved, such as John Cowan, participate in relevant W3C Working Groups. If the community of supporters of MicroXML wishes to bring this to W3C, there are several options.”
What is the MicroXML specification’s fate going forward? Will it be adopted by users or approved by the W3C? “I'd like to see it adopted by users to help them solve their problems,” Cowan said. “And if standardization by the W3C or another standards organization helps that goal, then I'm all for standardization and I'd be willing to work on it.”