Many Internet information systems are not able to communicate with each other at reasonable costs -- cost here means: dollars, time, systems integration, and learning curves, i.e., training.

EDI is perceived by many to have a high barrier of entry, not unlike SGML. It has been said that XML is to SGML what ebXML will be to EDI: a lowering or removing of barriers so that these standards [XML, and its Initiatives] are available to just about everyone.

Present EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) systems -- are expensive, built around legacy systems architecture, have long learning curves, and do not easily interface between heterogenous systems.

Lots of expertise is needed to make these systems a reality, and many small to mid-sized companies can not afford this type of data interchange.

XML-formatted data feeds tend to provide much richer content, both because of the extensibility of the data structure and because transmissions aren't as heavily tariffed. XML can also address business processes that EDI doesn't address at all: such as returns and warranty claims