Glenn K. Smith, of Pamida, Inc., wrote Friday: "My company wants to do XML but I need some intro information to present to upper management." Dear Glenn: You weren't clear as to *WHAT* your company wants to do with XML. XML can be used in any number of ways: some useful, some to no real effect unless for pedagogical satisfaction, and others downright harmful. XML was original invented by the Webheads in order to address the shortcomings in HTML. HTML provides no easy means to separate data from presentation. With XML, the data can arrive separately at the browser, perhaps reusing a cached style sheet. This makes it possible to offload work from the server onto the client, all the while giving the user a more pleasant experience; for example, instead of the server serving up a new dynamically generated HTML page when the user asks for 20 more line items, you could send one complete dataset in XML, and the browser could use a single style sheet to quickly display locally 10 or so line items at a time as the user scrolled down. All without any form posts to the server, and no network traffic. The effect on the user's, the network's and the server's performance can be dramatic. Other clever uses of XML and style sheets allow you to do things which may have been difficult before, requiring the building of bit maps at the server and sending huge traffic on the network to the client. As an example, take a look at QRS' qXML at http://www.qrs.com/qxml/, where nutritional information and ingredients encoded in XML could be rendered graphically as the familiar nutrition facts label using a style sheet. If this is the type of stuff that you want to do with XML, then as George "Dubya" Bush would say: "Go with it, Big Boy." Just be aware that the client browsers may not yet be up to snuff yet, but eventually your investment in XML and style sheets will pay off as everyone migrates to the newer browsers. You may even want to use XML for EAI, Enterprise Application Integration. EAI is one buzzword I didn't see among all the others in Dave Paraiso's Georgetown EC/EDI/XML Certification Announcement this morning; I had to come up with that all on my own by reading Sterling's press releases. Hooking together disparate internal applications requires "glue", and simple messaging using XML tagged documents may be the way to achieving some consistency among different applications and even operating system platforms. Your applications may be talking to one another right now using bailing wire, chewing gum and a variety of flat files and shared databases. Switching to XML as interfaces need changing may pay dividends in simplified maintenance. But more likely than not, because all the hype points in that direction, you may be considering XML for the exchange of inter-enterprise application-to-application business messages, replacing what traditional EDI has been doing for years. This is where one might tread very carefully, especially as it affects your relationship with your company's supply chain. We've talked a lot on EDI-L about XML/EDI, and so far there seems nothing compelling about it unless accompanied by more significant business process reengineering. RosettaNet may be worth watching for this reason, even though as an IT supply chain initiative it probably will not address your business model. But stay away from stuff that poses as XML/EDI, for it is merely XML window dressing for old EDI. Using XML wrappers for X12 or EDIFACT buys you nothing. X12 and EDIFACT may have some problems, but they don't go away with the use of wrappers as the DIN proposes for EDIFACT, or as demonstrated at http://www.xedi.org/. And ebXML, or Electronic Business XML, at http://www.ebxml.org/ should definitely be on your radar screen. Frankly, ebXML is the best opportunity for all the players, including the major e-commerce initiatives, to come together under one umbrella to devise one, global, consistent and interoperable framework for business messaging. The case for ebXML is so compelling that at the Denver X12 Trimester Meeting last week, all attention was paid to ebXML. The UN/EDIFACT Working Group has already emphatically endorsed ebXML; see the UN/CEFACT Press Release from December 9th - "UN/CEFACT Endorses ebXML Initiative, Puts Its Own XML Programme on Hold", at http://www.unece.org/cefact/. Likewise, it's expected the ASC X12 Steering Committee will put all X12 XML efforts firmly in sync with ebXML; thereby avoiding dissipating scarce X12 energy and attention with other XML distractions where everyone goes off in all directions building an XML Tower of Babel. Expect the first deliverable from the ebXML Initiative to be a "Grand Unified" technical specification on Transport, Packaging and Routing. There was not much I could lend to the technical aspects of X12's coordination with ebXML, as far brighter luminaries were handling that function. But my literary bent allowed me to contribute the Lincolnesque catchphrase describing ebXML as "last best hope of X12," oft quoted throughout the remainder of the week-long meeting. William J. Kammerer FORESIGHT Corp. 4950 Blazer Memorial Pkwy. Dublin, OH USA 43017-3305 (614) 791-1600 Visit FORESIGHT Corp. at http://www.foresightcorp.com/ "Commerce for a New World" ======================================================================= To signoff the EDI-L list, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list owner: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/edi-l%40listserv.ucop.edu/
