Not a Standard, but plays one on the Internet
The webml.org site gives the impression this is an open web standard but a little investigation will show there's no such standard and the dot org site is just a front for the Italian company pushing software whose price they won't even put in plain view. For an example of real internet standards see the W3c or ISC or other <whatever>ML promulgating entities. Text appears to try to create the impression this is a standard attempting to gain ground which is used by the WebRatio software among others when in fact it's a closely held intellectual property component of said product line and used only in it or aftermarket extensions of it. Lycurgus (talk) 18:37, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- Have checked and the software is referenced in academic journals albeit for the most part by persons associated with the commercial venture mentioned although not exclusively so. However "WebML" does in all the references I've so far seen refer to the identified closely held intellectual property, and apparently not occuring outside of their commercial offerings in actual use. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 20:27, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- If someone is looking, as I was, for a real web standard for site structure, in one sense there isn't one and in another WSDL plus sitemaps probably comes the closest. Since I intend to work on a mash-up of WSDL and other actual standards and free tools and offer both free and priced service in support of same, I will recuse myself of further involvement in this article. Lycurgus (talk) 00:52, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Revise or delete...
Regardless of whether this is actually a standard that is used somewhere or not (I took the course mentioned in the external links, and I highly doubt it,) this article would be better off being deleted than just left as is. It's without structure, it's incomplete, it's badly organised, and it is full of grammatical and spelling errors. It is a total disaster. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 19:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
- In addition to the above: this page has no scientifical value at all as it even contains a smiley in the 'What is WebML' section. Moreover, it mainly seems to describe the authors preferences as it makes unverifiable, or at least unreferenced, statements out of the blue (e.g. 'But preferred model by authors of WebML is UML'). Heuster (talk) 09:10, 14 September 2008 (UTC)