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

RE: Fallacies of Validation, version #2

• To: "Bullard, Claude L \(Len\)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Subject: RE: Fallacies of Validation, version #2
• From: w3c@d...
• Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 08:42:20 -0400
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9FBDE@h...>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9FBDE@h...>
• User-agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.2 / FreeBSD-4.8

Len,

GJDXM is a classic train-wreck.

The scary part is people build these schema 'dictionaries-of-domain-elements'
without even determining the use cases.  We're back to my - 'oh all we need is
a schema' rant again.

So when the GJDXM people did actually stop to ask user communities what they
wanted - they realized that there was no way that GJDXM can be deciphered and
purposed to provide that.

Solution - instead of using CAM - let's invent our own 'CAM'.

Sometimes you just shake your head.  But full credit to them for continuing to
get funded for all this - someone must believe they have all the right
answers.

Oh well.

DW

p.s.  fighting complexity is a tough battle everywhere - not just OASIS.  some
vendors thrive on complexity - since they figure only their vast team resources
can figure out the implementation details then.  Automatic lock-in.  Also - if
something is inherently simple - why hire legions of consultants?  So "the
system" has a vested interested in perpetuating schema - oops - I meant
complexity ; -)

======================================================================
Quoting "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>:

> Re the dynamics aspect of schema creation:
> 
> While it is fun to discuss AI or other scripting 
> programs creating schemas by looking at lots of 
> samples, in my experience, this gets done by 
> the dudes and dudettes sitting at ends of email 
> or telephone pipes exchanging spippets of 
> understanding.  As Graham notes, most of it 
> is hacking examples.  I think this is particularly 
> true if their is a very large and very abstract 
> standard schema with six or seven layers of 
> complex declarations in the middle (think 
> Justice Global XML or some of the more hideous 
> paramerterized DTDs one finds left over from 
> CALS).
> 
> I've been watching a new to markup but experienced guy 
> trying to negotiate a simple web service interface 
> based on GJXDM and I am convinced that before 
> it is all done, we'll end up carving that beast 
> into something a lot more directly understandable 
> and simpler.
> 
> Word to the wise in the Justice Department and 
> in the OASIS working groups:
>  
> Simpler is better even if it means more to 
> manage, particularly where urgency of 
> implementation is high.
> 
> 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://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
> 
> 

• References:
  • RE: Fallacies of Validation, version #2
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: are native XML databases needed?
• Next by Date: Re: Fallacies of Validation, version #2
• Previous by thread: RE: Fallacies of Validation, version #2
• Next by thread: RE: Fallacies of Validation, version #2
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread