[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web
At 14:49 06/06/2004, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: >At 12:56 PM +0100 6/6/04, Dave Pawson wrote: >This response demonstrates yet another common fallacy in software design. >There are unexamined principles at the foundation of your question which >are so deeply ingrained in your thinking that it doesn't occur to you that >they need to be examined or justified, but they do. Sheesh, you read minds too? >The fallacy here is that a document has some sort of processing >expectation, but this is simply not true in the heterogeneous world of the >Internet. Maybe not in your world. It is in mine. >The document is what it is, and will be processed differently by different >actors. I likely do not want to do the same thing with the same document >as you do, nor is it necessary that I do so. The demand that we provide >and adhere to schemas is often little more than a demand that we process >documents in only certain preapproved ways. That is a fundamentally >limited perspective. Business often finds that useful. I don't call that limited. >You are assuming that the extensions must be processed because they're there. You're reading my mind again I see. > I disagree. If I don't need them, I am free to ignore them. My only > concern is whether the document contains what I need in order to perform > my task. You likely have different requirements for that document than I > do. I do not guess how to handle anything. I take what I need, and ignore > the rest. And what form of schema validation do you use to ensure that what you need is there? >>>Sometimes the answer, is "I don't know" and the document may need to be >>>kicked to a human for further analysis. >> >>Which some might equate to 'fall over and die'? > >Absolutely not. The fact is computers aren't that smart, and robust >systems allow and prepare for human intervention. In practice, most >debugged and deployed systems rarely require human intervention of this sort. I've not met many such perfect systems. >>I think the SGML world got it right on this one. > >As proven by the massive success of SGML, and the complete failure of XML. :-) Bit of a leap there? DaveP.
|
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
|