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

Re: Schemas As Anti-bodies and Dynamical Systems

• To: "David Lyon" <david.lyon@c...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Schemas As Anti-bodies and Dynamical Systems
• From: "Nathan Young" <natyoung@c...>
• Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 15:28:49 -0800
• Cc: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>, "'Michael Kay'" <mike@s...>
• In-reply-to: <200502150815.16083.david.lyon@c...>
• Organization: Cisco Systems
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE07206BE7@h...> <opsl7e3lw3tk791m@mailman> <200502150815.16083.david.lyon@c...>
• User-agent: Opera M2/7.54u1 (Win32, build 3918)

A lot of processes have a human in the loop.  Sometimes unavoidably.  One  
big effect is as a transaction limiting factor.  You just can't spread a  
virus as fast if a person has to click to make it happen, even if you can  
get them to do it consistently (which is hard even when it is in their  
best interest).

------------>Nathan

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 08:15:15 -0500, David Lyon  
<david.lyon@c...> wrote:

> On Monday 14 February 2005 03:27 pm, Nathan Young wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> In cases where I've found validation useful, the subset of documents I'm
>> interested in is a much smaller and more specific set of documents than
>> the set that I would like to exclude.  This makes "accept if" conditions
>> easier to define than "reject if" conditions.
>
> Yes.
>
>> I think in general this is the case and has led to the current state
>> of document validation, but I agree that it need not always be so.
>
> The opposite opinion is where you have structured messaging that
> is done in a small business environment where practically all the
> validation is done at a human level.
>
> Humans nut through the a rendering of the documents, work out if the
> documents make sense and reject ones that don't. Click a button to
> reject it or get further information and make it go away for a while.
>
> One question I have is whether it is such a good idea to let the
> humans in.... oh well it's all good fun...
>
> David
>



-- 


.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:.

Nathan Young
A: ncy1717
E: natyoung@c...

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Schemas As Anti-bodies and Dynamical Systems
    • From: david.lyon@c...

• References:
  • RE: Schemas As Anti-bodies and Dynamical Systems
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>
  • Re: Schemas As Anti-bodies and Dynamical Systems
    • From: "Nathan Young" <natyoung@c...>
  • Re: Schemas As Anti-bodies and Dynamical Systems
    • From: David Lyon <david.lyon@c...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Public Review of OASIS ebXML RIM and RS v3.0 specifications
• Next by Date: Re: Schemas As Anti-bodies and Dynamical Systems
• Previous by thread: Re: Schemas As Anti-bodies and Dynamical Systems
• Next by thread: Re: Schemas As Anti-bodies and Dynamical Systems
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread