[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Creating a single XML vocabulary that is appropriately cus
Hi Roger: This is too long. No time to go short. Apologies. The business case is that one has to determine what is being required and not attempt to build a one size fits all or a 'this can live for two centuries' schema unless that IS the job. The jobs rots in the terms: appropriate for a community. Too often they are communal in name only. A fellow on Scoble's blog had a wonderful description in which he said sometimes we really should get outside and quit listening only to our own echo chamber (A-listers may not really matter). The time and effort spent reconciling some n number of different systems is mostly spent communicating and negotiating. The problem of web industries originates in the standards game where it becomes a competitive advantage to be the owner of the language. Web designers too often start with the 'first we form a committee to achieve consensus across the industry' instead of concentrating on building a product that happens to support XML in and XML out. This can paralyze the development team and delay the time to market of an otherwise simpler product. Sometimes it is better to build that core product first and compete with it in the market. We too often think that the rationality of the design reflects something in the real world. In meatspace, you can have five instances of what you rationally believe are the same type of transaction only to discover each agency has local quirks that they will not or cannot give up. The question is is it cost-effective in the market to try to build for these or is it better to tell the customer to scrap the quirks and force the cost of evolution back into their hands? I suspect that systems such as the medical records systems are rife with this. We know it is there in the public safety systems. Too many problems are proposed to be solved in single systems or procurements. An RFP with too many moving parts with squishy insides appears (single citations of giant efforts that turn out on inspection to be incomplete or unimplemented and in some cases unimplementable). The vendor signs up, the citations are in the contract, then the vendors ride the tiger. At the conclusion (when the money runs out), what is delivered is Rube Goldberg. I understand that the flip side is lots of little systems that don't communicate perfectly, but my experience is the friction of lots of little systems can be smoothed easier over time locally than trying to smooth it out all globally at once because like smoothing lumps in your bed, push on one and another pops up because a new requirement was discovered or introduced. It is classic whackamole. To get around this, it can be better to consider the arabesque as a lot of little segments and deal with each separately. That is why messaging system dominate document systems on the web although it isn't the case for the humans. Humans adapt nicely to conditional documents but try to build a fully role/agency system for multiple agencies under multiple umbrellas, eg health, public safety, transportation, etc. as the Department of Homeland Security does seeking 100% coverage and full up automation with air tight traceability. Eventually someone explains to you the dispatcher picks up the phone and calls the dispatcher in the next county. Fully automated intelligent dispatch is a gremlin. Designing for evolution doesn't mean evolving the system to its end state before its birthday. It means it works for the requirement at hand and can be adjusted. If that means clean up, it's a better option than expensive delays and no delivery. You are asking where to set the customization features. There is no single good answer. There are techniques (eg, Schematron, wild cards, renaming, etc.,). But as for 'appropriateness', YMMV. One size fits all is an attractive form but a bad fit and an endlessly complicated function. len From: Costello, Roger L. [mailto:costello@m...] Steve Newcomb wrote: > In retrospect, it seems possible that the W3C's > focus on machine-to-machine communication and > AI left little room for questions about human > issues, like the issue of how to deal with the > fact that top-down authority over document types > simply can't work across diverse human communities. > This story is very far from being over. And Len Bullard wrote: > Given my druthers, I'd rather maintain multiple > schemas over trying to convince multiple groups > with different semantics in the same community > that they should converge. The mammal problems > are the most expensive. "top-down authority over document types simply can't work across diverse human communities" "The mammal [human] problems are the most expensive" These are very thought-provoking comments. I would be appreciative if you - Steve and Len (or anyone) - would elaborate upon these comments. I am eager to have my eyes opened to new ways of thinking and dealing with information. /Roger _______________________________________________________________________ XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS to support XML implementation and development. To minimize spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting. [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/ Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@l... subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@l... List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
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
|