Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] XML and Complex Systems (was Re: Re: An Architecture forLimeri
 1/13/2002 7:43:43 AM, Sean McGrath <sean.mcgrath@p...> wrote: > > Nature figured this out long before we > sentients did. Extreme programming/well-formed XML/ > procedural scripting is a good toolset to start > with to mimic natures ability to grow complex order > out of large assemblies of simple interactions. In nature, > powerful functionality emerges from the bottom up. > The queen in the ant hill is not a monarch. There is no > "top down management" and the functionality > did not emerge from a top down design. Sean may be reading the same stuff that I am lately! Maybe "Emergence: The Connected Lives of Ants, Brains, Cities, and Software" by Steven Johnson .... Also, I'm not sure what more I can say about this (being tangentially involved), but people might want to look at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0201776413/qid= 1010934914/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_10_3/002-3841261-8649657 when it is published in a couple of months. Do you have any reading lists to suggest along this line, Sean? Anyway, I'm trying to sort out in my mind a "thesis" that goes something like this: XML was conceived as "SGML for the Web," combining aspects of both its SGML heritage and its Web heritage. SGML puts the Document Type Definition at the center of an application; design begins with a document analysis, proceeds through a detailed DTD design, and ends up with application components that are highly designed and coordinated by the "authority" of the DTD. In other words, the DTD is sortof the "queen ant" (in the old-fashioned sense) whose authority keeps it all together. XML's formal development within the W3C has tended in this vein, though of course a typed XML schema and PSVI is the "queen" of a state of the art XML application. This works fine in "behind the firewall" environments (or really well organized industries) where the complexity can be managed by authority. This tends to not work when there isn't an authoritative schema (or many contending schema, or schema in rapid evolution), and this "balkanization" or "tower of babel" is perceived by many as a crisis for XML. For a recent example, http://www.eweek.com/article/0,3658,s% 253D1884%2526a%253D20656,00.asp "Now, more than three years after XML's introduction, IT shops implementing industry- specific variants find themselves looking at multiyear, multimillion-dollar projects that leave two fundamental obstacles unchallenged: how to shift partners from trading through traditional means to trading with XML and how to interoperate with other industries. " Of course, one solution is for customers to sell their souls to a dominant vendor with a useable schema, or to lash the standards groups until they come up with usable vendor neutral schemata, but think of the other half of XML's legacy -- the Web -- and what made it succeed without a dominant vendor or centralized authority. That's where, as Sean noted, the modern conception of the ant queen as simply the mother of the colony becomes an interesting metaphor: Anthills exhibit effective "emergent" behavior by individuals operating very simply, the queen does nothing but lay eggs and nobody coordinates (except Darwin, of course). Likewise with the web, no committee laid out requirements for the Web and reviewed designs to achieve it. Instead, its features are the emergent properties that appeared when TCP/IP and HTTP produced a reasonably reliable universal network and the simple but powerful HTML (and later XML) markup languages became almost universally supported in browsers and authoring tools. I'm not at all sure what this vision of an alternative, loosely coupled approach to using XML to build complex networks of Web applications/services implies for us, other than "stop worrying about balkanization and seeking uniformity," "keep the components simple" and "try lots of things, keep the successes, and kill off the failures." Steven Johnson's book discusses some ways to use the "ants following pheromone trails" metaphor to improve the Web, especially www.alexa.com, which provides a feedback loop that HTTP/HTML doesn't have natively. I'd say that Google has done a lot along these lines as well, as have weblogs. To the best of my knowledge (and it is pretty much gossip and hearsay), the Wall Street types have thrown a lot of money at the complexity theorists in Santa Fe and gotten little return on their investment, so I'm not at all suggesting that we develop Strange Attractor Markup Language or takes ants and swarms and boids too literally as models for web services. But I do think that there is SOMETHING here, and I'm very glad to see Sean thinking the same way ...and would be very glad to hear from both people who think they can effectively debunk this and from those who think they can add flesh to its bones. 
|
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
|
|||||||||
