Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Just a Little Explanaton for Veering (RE: Blueberry/Unicode/ XML)
 Sorry about bad line breaks in previous message. Here is a smoothed version. > As such, Don's comments about "self-assigned" concerns could not possibly > apply to me. > > Undoubtedly Don includes himself in his approbation and will not say > anything more on the subject, being himself "self-assigned." Yes to both. I typically include myself in the group I blast. Although I was born and raised in Korea, I still consider myself to be self-assigned and guilty of patronizing fellow Koreans. Self-interest does not preclude self-sacrifice nor reflection. It still remains whether Chinese government hiring someone like you to ensure X and Y are possible to do in XML with Chinese language, represents: a) the will of the people (sorry, users) b) the right design decision over time > On the substance of Don's comment, when markup languages did not support > native-language markup, they were never popular in China/Korea/Japan. Now > that they do, they are more popular. I beg to differ. XML is popular in China/Korea/Japan because they are already familiar with HTML and of all the hoopla we are making in the Western Hemisphere over it as the next Holy Grail. They have tinkered with Chinese-enabled Forth and other languages, but they have accepted limitations of C, Java, and Perl without any significant complaint. I haven't heard anyone complaining why the new C# identifiers can't be Chinese. Why is it such an issue in XML names? > One of the great reasons is learning: people can learn using examples in > familiar words. If we look at books on XML from Japan or China, the ones > written in Japan (e.g. Okui-san's books) use kanji element names. The > learner can concentrate on the substance without being diverted > by English: > they will not be confused as to what is a keyword and what is a > situation-dependent name. There is an advantage in those examples being > real. I agree with this. My position is that human is adaptable enough to surmount most problems yet will loudly complain if given a chance. As you and others have pointed out, 'Direct Representation' is obviously desirable, but the cost is 'Common Representation'. I truely wonder how disturbed Chinese collegues are by the infamous <A> tag and how the right balance between Direct and Common Representation can be found in any given domain. > Where are the calls from third-world countries: > "Don't make technology easier for us please"? You must surely know that over-sea phonecalls are too expensive for silly pranks. Seriously, Rick. You and I agree on many, if not all, of the problems. We just disagree on the solutions. Best, Don Park Docuverse 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
