[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: RE: XML is Like a Box of Chocolates
And not in a world full of rtf controls, pngs, bmps, tiffs, and so on. Panglossian. len Quoting David Lee <dlee@calldei.com>: > So you've tossed plain text and multimedia (audio, video etc) as useful? > > > Sent from my iPad (excuse the terseness) > David A Lee > dlee@calldei.com<mailto:dlee@calldei.com> > > > On Mar 5, 2012, at 7:59 PM, "Kurt Cagle" > <kurt.cagle@gmail.com<mailto:kurt.cagle@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > Bruce, > > I like Jenni Tennisons notion that we are moving to an > infrastructure in which all data moves over one of four formats: > html (rich text), xml (documents), json (data structures) and rdf > (assertions), with the caveat that rdf's preferred format is turtle > notation. It's an intriguing thought. > > Kurt Cagle > > On Mar 5, 2012 5:52 PM, "Cox, Bruce" > <Bruce.Cox@uspto.gov<mailto:Bruce.Cox@uspto.gov>> wrote: > Roger L. Costello, your tombstone will be labeled "The Great > Provocateur" and carved in the shape of a Valrhona Truffle. How > dare you refer to the contents of a box of chocolate as "meaningless!" > > Of course, the organization and processing of content is HIGHLY > MEANINGFUL, even if only to the businesses that invest in its XML > representation. Do you suppose that the idea of organization is > somehow a fiction used to seduce those with money to give it to > those who play with pointy brackets? Granted, I've seen similar > tactics used to milk DARPA funding, but we aren't all so mercenary. > > Kidding aside (yes, that was actually intended to be a joke, so > please don't anyone take it seriously), I think you've swung the > pendulum too far to the abstract with this analogy, Roger. If there > is meaning in XML, it's in the content, not the syntax. But if > there is a right way to process the content, that process is guided > by the markup. The markup lubricates that special part of the > business process that can be reduced to symbol processing. If there > is one paramount constraint on that processing, it is that it must > not violate the meaning invested in the content by the content > owners. Believe me, that's a trick worth performing, and paying for. > > However, I think your analogy is worth developing. It will > certainly hold the attention of your readers. And consider a role > for wrapping paper. > > Somewhat off topic: Which brings to mind a program on Science > channel (How it's Done? Mega factories?) that showed a major UPS > sorting center. Bar codes were used for most packages to move them > from the flight they arrived on to the loading dock of the flight or > truck they were leaving on. But not all. Very large or small > packages got sorted using other methods, usually requiring manual > intervention to a greater or lesser degree. XML, like bar codes, > will cover a wide range of processing, but not all cases. > > Bruce B Cox > OCIO/AED/Software Architecture and Engineering Division > 571-272-9004<tel:571-272-9004> > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Costello, Roger L. > [mailto:costello@mitre.org<mailto:costello@mitre.org>] > Sent: 2012 March 4, Sunday 09:06 > To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org<mailto:xml-dev@lists.xml.org> > Subject: XML is Like a Box of Chocolates > > Hi Folks, > > XML is like a box of chocolates. > > Here's how: > > -------------------------------------------------- > Organize the Chocolates that I Received > -------------------------------------------------- > > Recently I received some chocolates: > > - Truffles, I put them in a box and wrote on the outside of the box > "Spherical" > - M&Ms, I put them in another box and wrote on the outside of that > box, "Shiny" > - Chocolate covered peanuts, I received a lot so I divided them > into two boxes and wrote on the outside of each box, "Nutty" > > I stacked the boxes like so: Spherical on top of Shiny on top of the > two Nutty. > > Then I took this stack and put them all inside a box and wrote on > the outside of that box, "Chocolates" > > Oh, I also received a chocolate bar which I hooked on top of the > "Chocolates" box. > > See how I organized the chocolates? > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > What's the Meaning of that Organization of Chocolates? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I hooked the chocolate bar on top of the "Chocolates" box. Is there > some special significance to that? > > I placed the two "Nutty" boxes on the bottom of the stack. Is there > some special significance to that? > > What's the meaning of this organization? > > Obviously it has no meaning. It is simply the way I organized my > chocolates. To attach meaning to this organization is assigning > meaning where none exists. > > XML is like this organization of chocolates. An XML document is just > a collection of data where each item of data has been boxed > (enclosed in start-tag, end-tag pairs) or hooked onto a box > (attribute). There is no meaning to the organization. > > ---------------------------- > Eating the Chocolates > ---------------------------- > > Today I ate a truffle. When I eat a truffle I like to take my time > and enjoy it, so I bite off just a tiny piece, let it sit in my > mouth until it melts, and then swallow it; then repeat with the next > tiny bite. > > My brother, on the other hand, pops the entire truffle into his > mouth, chews on it for a few seconds, and swallows it. > > -------------------------------------------------- > What's the Right Way to Eat Chocolates? > -------------------------------------------------- > > I eat chocolates in a different way than my brother. Am I right and > he's wrong? > > Obviously not. We are each entitled to eat chocolates however we desire. > > I should mention that I eat brussel sprouts differently than I eat > chocolates. For brussel sprouts I pop one into my mouth, quickly > chew, and swallow. So if I were doing a blind taste test of various > foods, it would be hard for me to know how to eat each food. > > I need to know "what" I am eating to know "how" to eat it. > > Analogously, there is no right way to process XML. To each his own. > What is important, however, is to know "what" the data is. > > ------------------------------- > Giving Gifts of Chocolate > ------------------------------- > > I think chocolates are a great gift. So last Christmas I gave a box > of chocolates to each of my siblings. > > Earlier I described an organization of chocolates. I used that as a > template. For each sibling I made a box of chocolates following that > template. That is, to be placed within each "Chocolates" box are: > > - 1 box containing truffles > - 1 box containing M&Ms > - 2 boxes containing chocolate covered peanuts. > > And hooked onto the "Chocolates" box is a chocolate bar. > > ------------------------------------------------ > What's the Meaning of this Template? > ------------------------------------------------ > > Does the template give meaning to the gift boxes? > > Obviously not. The template simply shows "how to" organize the boxes > (or, once accomplished, how each box is organized). > > Likewise, XML Schema (and Relax NG and DTD) just show "how to" > organize data in XML documents. Schemas have no meaning. > > --------- > Recap > --------- > > An XML document is just an organization of data. Organization has no > meaning. Be careful that you don't implicitly assign meaning where > none exists. For example, XML attributes are not "meta-data" and > they have no "scope". Analogously, it would be foolhardy to claim > that because the chocolate bar is hooked onto the "Chocolates" box > it is somehow "meta-chocolate" and it "scopes" all the chocolates > inside the box. > > XML documents can be processed any way you want. There is no right > way. Don't prescribe "how" to process data. However, do describe > "what" the data is. But don't depend on the element or attribute > names to describe "what" the data is. I labeled the box containing > the M&Ms "Shiny", that hardly tells "what" is inside the box. > Describe "what" the data is using a data specification and possibly > an ontology. > > XML Schema (and Relax NG and DTD) are just templates that describe > how to organize XML documents. Schemas have no meaning. > > ------------------------- > Related Discussions > ------------------------- > > The Edge of Chaos: Where Syntax Ends and Interpretation Begins > (http://www.xfront.com/The-edge-of-chaos-where-syntax-ends-and-interpretation-begins.pdf) > > The XML Literalist (http://www.stylusstudio.com/xmldev/201103/post90060.html) > > Comments? > > /Roger >
[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
|