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

RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".

• To: "'Bullard, Claude L (Len)'" <clbullar@i...>, 'Mike Champion' <mc@x...>, "'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
• From: Nicolas LEHUEN <nicolas.lehuen@u...>
• Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 16:02:58 +0100

There is a related link on Cafe con Leche (thanks Elliote) :

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_534847.html?menu=news.latestheadlines

Laser discs wrote 15 years ago can't be read... What about the Web ? We
still can browse a part of the web's past thanks to the Internet Archive
(http://www.archive.org/), but how will we do this in 5 or 10 years, when
common browsers will support different standards ?

Building a technology should always be done as if it would eventually become
legacy technology. But how to do that ?

The problem is not only related to computers and the Web. Have a look at The
Long Now foundation, which has one objective of building a clock that can
run 10.000 year :

http://www.longnow.org/10kclock/clock.htm

I think the principles can have positive echoes in the XML community :

http://www.longnow.org/10kclock/clock.htm

* Longevity 
With occasional maintenance, the clock should reasonably be expected to
display the correct time for the next 10,000 years. 

* Maintainability 
The clock should be maintainable with bronze-age technology. 

* Transparency 
It should be possible to determine operational principles of the clock by
close inspection. 

* Evolvability 
It should be possible to improve the clock with time. 

* Scalability 
It should be possible to build working models of the clock from table-top to
monumental size using the same design.

Some rules that follow from the design principles: 

Longevity: 
Go slow 
Avoid sliding friction (gears) 
Avoid ticking 
Stay clean 
Stay dry 
Expect bad weather 
Expect earthquakes 
Expect non-malicious human interaction 
Dont tempt thieves 

Maintainability and transparency: 
Use familiar materials 
Allow inspection 
Reherse motions 
Make it easy to build spare parts 
Expect restarts 
Include the manual 

Scalability and Evolvabilty: 
Make all parts similar size 
Separate functions 
Provide simple interfaces 

Regards,
Nicolas

>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:clbullar@i...]
>Envoyé : mardi 5 mars 2002 15:40
>À : 'Mike Champion'; xml-dev@l...
>Objet : RE:  XML doesn't deserve its "X".
>
>
>How about this:  it is time for the innovation 
>in computers in general and the web in particular 
>to stop.  It is time for a regulated standard to 
>be created and enforced by statute such that if 
>one buys a computer and a program to run on it 
>today, it will run on a computer that you buy 
>50 years from now, and that the computer you 
>buy today will run any program written 50 
>years from now.
>
>It works for TV and automobiles.  Why not computers?
>We must get out of the experimenter/hobbyist 
>phase and enable people to get the most out 
>of their investment.  The situation today 
>is ALL Bill Gates' fault, of course.
>
>;-)
>
>That's not an original thought or even a troll. 
>It was proposed in an article this past weekend 
>and comes from a journalist think tank type.
>
>The next new thing will be an old thing 
>that had a short burst of notoriety, was 
>dissed, and will be renamed and dressed, 
>and attributed to a 15 year old genius 
>(his mother swears he is) in Nebraska. 
>The money on the Next New Thing will of 
>course be mostly made by the really old 
>guys (45+ at least) who pay for the 
>prominent position on Google, in trades, 
>and on NPR.  C looks awfully warm and fuzzy.
>
>len
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>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>
>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
• Next by Date: Re: Namespaces and URIs (was: A good case for Namespace URIs)
• Previous by thread: RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
• Next by thread: RE: XML doesn't deserve its "X".
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread