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

Re: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web


semantic fallacy
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!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.