>> What do you mean by wonderful? I hope you don't think >> positional format is better than XML?
>Apples and oranges. You're comparing a layout type to a specific markup >language. I understand what you're saying, but I thought we were comparing it in the context of EDI. In which case, they are both apples. You can use XML to fulfill your EDI needs, or positional. :) >No, perhaps positional format is NOT better than XML -- I think it remains >to be seen. What I look at with half-lidded eyes is the assertions that XML >will solve all of our business problems. Thankfully, there's a lot less of >this 'silver bullet weenieism' today than in years past, but remember; if >the only tool you have is a hammer, every job looks like a nail. XML isn't >necessarily the answer to all of our ills. Very true. My perspective is more on the "open source" side of things. I'm tired of using proprietary translator software to achieve something that existing tools will take care of. Free XML/XSLT parsers can replace $75,000 EDI translators. And when you learn how to use XML/XSLT you have some knowledge that you can get more mileage out of- not knowledge of an ancient language that exists nowhere outside of 1-2 applications. Nothing will ever be perfect, but I think XML is a great fit for EDI. It will just take time. . Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC> Access the list online at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
