Apologies for the late post on this thread but I've just discovered this site (through this very interesting article) and feel compelled to reply to a couple of points it has raised.

First and foremost I can see both sides of the English language in IT argument, however, even as a seasoned developer I experience words and phrases used out of familiar/accepted context that leave me puzzled and so appreciate the odd post that clears things up. As such I think the 'silly person' comment was a little unnecessary although the content of that particular post by RLoski I found very interesting. For the record, Americans have been abusing my native tongue for centuries so why shouldn't the IT world jump onboard

Moving swiftly on, interesting point Sanjeev although it boils down to (in my experience) a matter of relevant architecture. Every problem for which a software solution is sought presents a unique set of requirements therefore there may be many reasons why an XML data store would be justifiably preferred to a (R)DBMS in a particular situation and vice versa. Cost, complexity, security, performance and time are a just a few of the factors that might sway such a decision.

But to answer the question 'Will XML replace other RDBMS', in my opinion the answer will always be no. What I think we will see more and more of are vendors optimizing software to use XML and integrating XML more closely with existing (R)DBMS.

PS I know I shouldn?t start sentences with 'but'