Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Again, sometimes they don't choose. Their employer chooses a platform. The platform developer chose the choice. Or the SOAP committee chooses the choice. This is the classic problem of targeting in a space that is resonant: little islands force repeated orbits. XSD isn't winning. XSD has won. Now it is a matter of market lifecycle (opportunity to choose repeatedly). You are exactly right about the 'only horse'. RELAX was a response, not a candidate. That means it was too late. It was also explained in terms of 'hedge automata' and not enough people could understand that fast enough until the examples were given. Again, intelligence doesn't scale. Thought experiment: if the original "DTD plus better data types" target had been conserved, would one get XSD? How did it drift into the complex beastie it is today? One retargeting decision at a time. Given enough iterations, the kind of chaotic jump to a different body to orbit can happen. What happened with XSD was a Hohmann transfer: energy traded for time. The jump to RELAX can happen but it takes time and a committed group that keeps it alive and in play. See X3D (no one can kill it and the biggest companies on the planet tried). What we are talking about though, is not the 'web' but a 'majority of developers who consider options' and have the ability to choose. For that, they have to have options, yes. For options to emerge, there has to be time. The assumption used politically and wrongly was that "Internet time favors the first mover". It does; it isn't an intelligent choice. The web favors mediocrity, fast choice and live with it or don't be In the In Group. The web actively works against intelligence because it doesn't have reach. Odd but so. The flaw in the position that "the web" chooses is like the flaw in the URI as a universal name, or that the only test of a technology is 'humanity benefits' which is another appeal to an abstract universal: the assumption of universal hegemony, or the right to choose the choices. Intelligence is a local effect. You can use it to target but to do that you have to trade time for energy. The critical decision in design is WHEN to get feedback and what kind of control is used to cull and promote selectors. See PID controls, parametric controls, adaptive controls, and limiters. len From: Elliotte Harold [mailto:elharo@m...] Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote: > We have XSD because it got the most votes at the time. It's that > simple. We got XSD because it was the only candidate running. The same people who developed it were the people who voted on it, and they only got to vote Yes or No. What did you expect to happen in an election like that? Now if the competition had not been XSD, yes or no; but XSD or RELAX NG? And if the people who voted were not themselves the developers of the languages; then the outcome might have been very different. Indeed that's exactly what seems to be happening in the marketplace. A strong majority of developers who actually consider both options are picking RELAX NG. XSD is winning only with developers who don't know they have a choice.
|
