Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: "The syntax view" was Re: [OT] Re: Less
![Re: "The syntax view" was Re: [OT] Re: Less](/images/get_stylus.gif) Thanks for your reply Simon. Now I understand. --Tim On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com> wrote: > On 11/17/13 3:34 AM, Timothy W. Cook wrote: >>> >>> My interest in markup is not purely technological, but rather about >>> markup's >>> being an almost unique intersection of humans and computers. Markup is a >>> set >>> of tools that lets humans gets directly in the information flow. >>> Computers >>> are certainly still involved, but their role is minimized to the extent >>> possible. >> >> >> I think I understand your perspective. Except, possibly what you >> intend to mean regarding 'information flow'. Am I correct in that >> this is in regards from one person to another person via computerized >> text? > > > Not necessarily directly, but "among people, with computers in the middle" > seems accurate. > > (There are people using XML for strictly computer to computer > communications, like sensors and controls, but I see no good reason now to > celebrate bloat.) > > >> So, if I am correct in seeing your perspective that the purpose of XML >> (in your perspective) is to delineate (markup?) textual content into >> sections? Also, that XML in its current and probable future state can >> do this for you in the way that you choose to use it? > > > Yes. > >> Can you *PLEASE* tell me how the fact that XML has other components >> that addresses other uses cases outside your own use case, harms you >> or your work in any way? >> >> IOW: If you are not forced to use XSD or namespaces to accomplish your >> goals with XML. Why are you so adamantly against them when they are >> >> useful to other people in different use cases. > > > Well, for starters, I get to waste hours of time explaining to people who've > been brainwashed into thinking that XSD and namespaces are the One True Way > of XML that there are other options. Even here, that's a surprising > ordinary case. (Why am I writing this for sixteenth or so time on a Sunday > morning?) > > Those tools and the lessons they've taught make it extremely difficult to > convince people to take another look, especially when the lessons they've > taught people are to run screaming away from XML and not look back. > > For a while, I figured that the XSD/Namespaces/etc. stuff would be fine, > just not for me. Other people clearly do have different use cases. Then, > thanks to my weird position as a writer, editor, and known critic, I had > lots of people telling me about how those tools were seen as the ruin of > entire projects. The stories added up too well. > > I heard similar stories about XSLT, but at least in those cases I could > _usually_ identify where XSLT had been the wrong tool for the job. > XSD/Namespaces stories were reliably about specifications gone brittle, > priorities set badly by people seeing different pieces of the same schemas, > and waterfall processes that made it hard to correct these issues. > > That doesn't mean there aren't use cases where XSD/Namespaces/etc. do apply > and can succeed. Nor does it mean that my case is right. It does, however, > make me marvel that the folks pushing XSD and Namespaces go right on doing > it as if they weren't selling toxic waste. > > So yes - an answer you probably won't like. XSD and Namespaces have made > the XML ecosystem toxic. "It works for me" gets repeated here like "Every > day in every way I get better and better" gets repeated by the > self-hypnotists of the Coue method. > > That's a lot of why I talk about markup in most contexts, and avoid talking > about XML unless it's to an XML audience or reached that level of > specificity. > > >> I have asked questions on this list about XML technologies that are >> specified and are in common use across domains. Hoping to get answers >> from people with more experience in XML. Like you, I know my domain. >> I can make the decision whether or not XML technologies are a good >> fit, if I can get technological NOT philosophical answers. > > > If you don't want philosophical answers, perhaps you should ask your > programs instead of people? > > Take a look at your foundations again. They're getting more brittle all the > time. > > > Thanks, > -- > Simon St.Laurent > http://simonstl.com/ > > _______________________________________________________________________ > > 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@lists.xml.org > subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org > List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php -- MLHIM VIP Signup: http://goo.gl/22B0U ============================================ Timothy Cook, MSc +55 21 94711995 MLHIM http://www.mlhim.org Like Us on FB: https://www.facebook.com/mlhim2 Circle us on G+: http://goo.gl/44EV5 Google Scholar: http://goo.gl/MMZ1o LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
[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
|
|||||||||
