COM-18-7987 Research Note R. Knox 30 December 2002 Commentary Here's What's Wrong With XML-Defined Standards It is relatively easy to construct XML standards for vertical domains. This has led to thousands of redundant and conflicting specifications. This chaos is the direct result of how these standards are developed. Extensible Markup Language (XML)-defined standards began with a number of vertically focused standards in 1999 (see Figure 1) but grew to an overwhelming number by 2001 (see Figure 2). Figure 1 All Tied Up With XML: 1999 Schema for OO Chemical Markup Financial Information XML (SOX) Weather Observation Language (CML) eXchange Markup Language XML Linking Markup Format (OMF) (FIXML) Language XML Forms Open MLS (Real Estate) (XLink) Architecture (XFA)Health Level 7 Resource Description Framework (RDF) Vector Markup (HL7) Language (VML) Signed Document Markup Open Trading Protocol (OTP) Language (SDML) Universal Commerce Synchronized Multimedia Language and Protocol Integration Language (SMIL) (UCLP) Commerce XML (cXML) Meta Content Document Commerce Business FrameworkObject Model (DOM) Library (CBL) (MCF) XML Metadata Extensible Forms Interchange (XMI) Description Language Bank Internet Open(XFDL) Software SmartX (Smart Card) Markup XML Data Payment Distribution (OSD) Language (SML) System Web Interface Scalable Vector XML Query Document Type Definition (DTD) Definition Graphics (SVG) Language (XML- Channel Definition Format Language (WIDL) QL) (CDF) Extensible Style XML-Electronic Language (XSL) Precision Graphics Markup Language (PGML) Web Data Interchange (XML-EDI) XML Namespaces Extensible Markup Collections Language (XML) Document Content XSL Transformations (XSLT) Information and Content Description (DCD) Exchange (ICE) Source: Gartner Research Gartner Entire contents © 2002 Gartner, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this publication in any form without prior written permission is forbidden. The information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable. Gartner disclaims all warranties as to the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of such information. Gartner shall have no liability for errors, omissions or inadequacies in the information contained herein or for interpretations thereof. The reader assumes sole responsibility for the selection of these materials to achieve its intended results. The opinions expressed herein are subject to change without notice. Figure 2. All Tied Up With XML: 2001 Geography MarkupOpen Health Care BIOpolymer Markup Language (BIOML) Straight Through Processing Markup Name and AddressHuman Markup Resources Language Markup (NAML) ExtensibleSchema Rights for OOMarkup XML Language (SOX) (XrML) AssociationLanguage (GML) for CooperativeRecords Operations XML Open Philanthropy XML Forms Language (STPML) Language (HRML)Human Markup Language Signed Document Markup Research and Development (ACORD) MusicXML eXchange Information(OPX)(HumanML) TechnologyArchitecture Markup (XFA)Language (SDML) Manufacturing Data Systems Inc XML Metal XML LanguageSociety (ITML)Predictive for Worldwide Model Markup Interbank Language Financial (MDSI-XML)EquationEpicentre of StateMarkup XML Exchange Language Format GeophysicalTelecommunication Markup Language Telecommunications Interchange Well (PMML)Log Markup Extensible CustomerStylesheet Identity Markup(eosML) ML Schools Interoperability(swiftML) Markup (TIM) Language (WellLogML)DirectoryFramework Services Markup (SIF) ExtensibleLanguage User (XSL) InterfaceLanguage (CIML) Research InformationLanguage eXchange (DSML) Markup Architecture, Engineering, Open MLS (real estate)Language (RIXML) LanguageFinancial (XUL) Information eXchange Security Assertion Markup Universal Construction XML (aecXML) XML Linking Language (XLink) MarkupRe-usable Language Data Markup (FIXML) Language (SAML) CommerceSystems Biology Web CollectionsElectronic Catalog Language and Language (RDML) Cell Markup Language Markup Language Bibliographic Markup XML (eCX) Protocol Weather Observation Markup (CellML) Molecular Dynamics(SBML) MarkupLegalXML Language (BiblioML)SoftwareSynchronization Open (UCLP) Format (OMF) Banner MarkupMeta Content Markup CommerceLanguage (MoDL) XML (cXML)XML Query Access Protocol (SOAP) Language (BannerML)Framework Language XMLPIPE for Environmental,(Partner InterfaceLanguage Process for Energy) (XML-QL) Commerce Business (MCF) (SyncML) Safety & OccupationalOpen Trading Protocol Library (CBL)Security Services Markup Vector Markup XML Court Interface (XCI)Language (S2ML) HealthSynchronized (esohXML.org) Multimedia(OTP) Extensible Forms Description Language Bioinformatic SequenceLanguage (VML) Integration Language (SMIL) Open Financial Exchange (OFX) (XFDL) Markup Language (BSML)The WellSchematicML Standard for the Exchange of Product Product Data Markup LanguageMeat (PDML)and Poultry User Interface Markup Project Virtual Model Data XML ( STEPml) Bank Internet Payment SystemVoice MarkupXML Language Language (UIML) Open Software Distribution (OSD) SmartX (smart card) Markup Instruments Markup Language Digital Property XML-Electronic (VoiceXML)DARPA Agent Markup Language (DAML) Language (SML)HealthResource Level 7 (HL7) Description Framework (RDF) Rights Data Interchange XML Metadata Extensible Media Commerce Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) XML Forms (Xforms) XSL TransformationsJobM Channel Definition Format Language (DPRL) (XML-EDI) Interchange (XMI)Language (XMCL) Standards for TechnologyeXtensible in Business Reporting ExtensibleChemical Markup Language (CML)XML DataBase(XSLT)ExtensibleL Style (CDF) Web Modeling Language UniversalAutomotive Description, Retail Discovery(STAR)/XML and Language (XBRL) Markup Extensible 3D (X3D)(dbXML) Language (XSL)Integration (UDDI)Precision Graphics Markup Language Trading Partner (WebML) Business Rules for E-Commerce (BREC) Electronic Business XML (ebXML) LanguageAgreement MarkupFinancial Planning Markup LanguageDocument Object Model (DOM)XML Namespaces (PGML) (XML) Web InterfaceXML Data DefinitionWeb Services Description Language (WSDL) Multi-Channel AccessXML Language (tpaML)(FpML)Corpus Encoding Standard for XML (XCES)Virtual Instruments Meta Language (VIML) Construction ManufacturingLanguage and (WIDL)Document Content Description (DCD) Agricultural Markup Language(MAXML) Extensible Graph Markup and Distribution Extensible SpacecraftMarkup Markup LanguageGene Expression (SML) Robotic Markup Markup Language ((AgXML) RoboML)Info. and Content Language (cmdXML) Modelling Language (XGMML)Language (GEML)Document Type Definition (DTD) Exchange (ICE) Source: Gartner Research The number of XML-defined standards is still growing and today is in the thousands of often-closely- related, redundant and often-conflicting standards. This problematic situation is the direct result of how these standards are developed and of at least four different problems. There Are No Rules. There are no rules that say what the scope of an XML standard must be, how big or small it can be, or how it should be developed. A single company may develop and publish a standard for public development and use. This was done originally, for example, with TaXML (www.taxml.org) and Value Chain Markup Language (VCML — see www.vcml.net). On the other hand, a group with global companies and organizations as members may be involved, as is the case with electronic business XML — www.ebXML.org, sponsored by Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS) and the United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business (UN/CEFACT). Certainly the scope of a global tax initiative (for example, TaXML) is extremely complex and must ultimately involve many players if it is to be successful. However, as originally initiated, it was relatively easy for a single company to provide the impetus and direction for the work. Well, why not? There are no requirements that dictate which groups must be involved based on the scope and potential impact of the standard that is ultimately developed. It's Too Easy to Get Into the Standards Game. Because of the interest in the domain a standard covers, the groups convened to create them can be very large (in contrast to the original work on TaXML). For example, Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL; www.xbrl.org) is a standard for exchanging and analyzing financial information. As such, it concerns the accounting industry, investors, public and private companies, and regulators. More than 170 companies, associations and government organizations participate. HR-XML (www.hr-xml.org) is developing XML specifications to automate human-resources-related data exchange; it has approximately 120 participating companies and organizations. Although all member organizations don't participate in all aspects of the standards development work, many have some say or contribution to much of it, and they often have voting and COM-18-7987 Copyright 2002 30 December 2002 2 approval rights. The level of agreement required complicates and slows down the development process, and often results in standards meeting the requirements of a lowest common denominator. Some wonder why the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) or OASIS doesn't supervise the standards work. The W3C's mission is to "lead the World Wide Web to its full potential by developing common protocols that promote its evolution and ensure its interoperability." Hence, its focus is on core standards like XML itself. OASIS is a global consortium that "drives the development, convergence and adoption of e-business standards." It