[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: constructive (was RE: Markup perspective not co

• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>,"Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: constructive (was RE: Markup perspective not code)
• From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
• Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 08:45:09 -0700
• Thread-index: AcI8lnnYu5Ns30EKRQiS6REkN/iQQAAAICZI
• Thread-topic: constructive (was RE: Markup perspective not code)

Maybe it's because I don't follow Java that closely any more vut can someone tell me exactly what Bosak is doing? Is this JAXB or something else? 

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:clbullar@i...] 
	Sent: Mon 8/5/2002 8:38 AM 
	To: 'Simon St.Laurent'; xml-dev@l... 
	Cc: 
	Subject: RE:  constructive (was RE:  Markup perspective not code)
	
	

	No, but tools that enable people to sit down in rooms
	and document the results of their negotiations in the
	forms of machine-processable understandings is a boon.
	Unless you are in a closed system of one authority, you
	cannot escape the negotiation toward final fixed forms.
	
	All Bosak is doing is precisely what SGMLers have always
	done:  organizing the selected names.   The problem of
	adding the programmers is that suddenly, XMLers want
	to define what the names mean too.  Implementing what
	they mean is a different task, and very programmer
	appropriate.  Strangely, that was almost the Hytime
	problem too.  The names of the names used to name
	the names became very obscure and that stifled the
	conversation like a fart in a crowded room.  MMTT.
	
	len
	
	-----Original Message-----
	From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...]
	
	At 08:39 AM 8/4/2002 -0400, Didier PH Martin wrote:
	>You know its easy to say, they are wrong when in fact we (and mostly the
	>W3 organization) created the situation. Its probably time to take some
	>responsibility of the consequences of the XML community actions and ways
	>of thinking. I know its not popular to say that :-)
	
	I'm not sure why creating XML "created the situation".  Before XML,
	developers had to think about how to exchange and store their information,
	and after XML, developers still have to think about how to exchange and
	store their information.
	
	The only thing that's changed is a common syntax (now markup) for some of
	that information.  I don't see how that creates a responsibility for markup
	to do the rest of a job that properly belong with developers close to the
	specific tasks that need to be solved.
	
	Perhaps in the enthusiasm about solving one problem (syntax) some folks
	thought that they weren't going to have to work anymore, but I don't think
	that's a problem for XML.  Instead, by attempting to solve all these
	developer problems, something you apparently want to continue doing, we've
	added all kinds of new problems to XML (and the W3C's use of "XML" in spec
	names adds to the perception that XML itself has the problems.)
	
	It's time to stop solving developers' problems generically, and let them
	solve the problems themselves building from only a basic syntactic
	framework - if and only if the framework is appropriate to their
	problem.  XML is not a magic wonder-glue for programming.
	
	
	-----------------------------------------------------------------
	The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
	initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
	
	The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
	
	To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
	manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
	
	

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: constructive (was RE: Markup perspective not code)
    • From: Miles Sabin <miles@m...>

• Prev by Date: flashback to 1997
• Next by Date: Re: constructive (was RE: Markup perspective not code)
• Previous by thread: RE: constructive (was RE: Markup perspective not code)
• Next by thread: Re: constructive (was RE: Markup perspective not code)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread