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

Re: A Systematic Approach to using Simple XML Vocabularies to

• To: Frank Manola <fmanola@a...>
• Subject: Re: A Systematic Approach to using Simple XML Vocabularies to Implement Large (Complex) Systems
• From: Rick Marshall <rjm@z...>
• Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 08:07:48 +1100
• Cc: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>, "'Roger L. Costello'" <costello@m...>, "'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <41C1DE02.5030005@a...>
• Organization: Zenucom Pty Ltd
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE07206A33@h...> <41C1DE02.5030005@a...>
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (X11/20040502)

Frank Manola wrote:

> Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>
>> And RDF reinvents how many existing and perfectly serviceable 
>> languages?  How much technology did XML reinvent?
>>
>> Let Roger noodle.  People and communities learn from that.
>> The questions are more important than this year's answers.
>>
>> len
>
>
> I've no built-in objection to reinvention (or to noodling either :-) 
> ), but (to repeat somewhat) I think the reinvention (if that's what it 
> is) would be more productive if (a) it were clearer whether what 
> needed inventing was model or syntax (or a combination), and (b) it 
> could build more on prior work (again, either on models, e.g. ER 
> models, or on syntax).  One reason to point to prior work is to focus 
> attention on what is *unsatisfactory* about that work, and hence on 
> where the bulk of the new work needs to be done.  People learn from 
> that too (it's the way science is supposed to work, after all;  and 
> engineering too).

and, as i have already alluded to, it's often very difficult to capture 
the subtleties of the established technology in the new. some of the new 
work can also be unsatisfactory and needs to evaluated against the old.

>
> --Frank
>
> PS:  Specifically regarding RDF, it reinvents and/or borrows from 
> quite a few languages/approaches (and the specs cite many of them);  
> starting off with logic, which is thousands of years old (depending on 
> who you listen to)
>
>>
>>
>> From: Frank Manola [mailto:fmanola@a...]
>>
>> Roger--
>>
>> To echo a previous comment, it seems to me you're largely (if not 
>> entirely:  I haven't been following this that closely) reinventing 
>> RDF, with somewhat different syntax.  It might help to clarify things 
>> to look at whether RDF's *model* (basically, things having identity, 
>> plus properties describing those things) does what you want, and it's 
>> the RDF *syntax* that's the problem, or whether there is something 
>> more fundamental going on.
>>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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>
>

begin:vcard
fn:Rick  Marshall
n:Marshall;Rick 
email;internet:rjm@z...
tel;cell:+61 411 287 530
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
version:2.1
end:vcard

• References:
  • RE: A Systematic Approach to using Simple XML Vocabularies to Implement Large (Complex) Systems
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>
  • Re: A Systematic Approach to using Simple XML Vocabularies to Implement Large (Complex) Systems
    • From: Frank Manola <fmanola@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: A Systematic Approach to using Simple XML Vocabulariesto Implement Large (Complex) Systems
• Next by Date: unibase bnf
• Previous by thread: Re: A Systematic Approach to using Simple XML Vocabularies to Implement Large (Complex) Systems
• Next by thread: [xsd] Schema in multiple documents
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread