[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
[Recent Entries]
[Reply To This Message]
RE: The Information Interchange Profession (was: XML As Fall G
- From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@hiwaay.net>
- To: "'Peter Hunsberger'" <peter.hunsberger@gmail.com>, "'Hans-Juergen Rennau'" <hrennau@y...>
- Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 18:47:18 -0600
Different jobs certainly require different
skills and facts at hand. The cause of XML, IMHO, is not to fix the understanding
or lack thereof. It is there to make it not matter in so far a a clean syntax
and a notional tree can do that. For machines, not quite enough information,
for humans, the tedium of adding semantics to syntax and revising both.
XML systems at large are very much hands
in the cookie jars toolkits. It is there to provide a representation however
realized in the iron that conveys the set of information the creator intends
and the consumer has to accept or reject. Note, I did not use the word,
producer, because it decouples intention from output.
At heart, the web is based on the notion that a creator and consumer are
blind. In practice, that’s ,,,, bull. We work with probably more and
more precise instructions than almost anyone in the enterprise when it comes to
validating product. XML is A QA practice: a rigor of preparing data such
that misunderstanding is rare if done to specification. This is why S1000D
and SharePoint are a cock up. Because it doesn’t handle XML easily and natively
(at least as well as say, Arbortext). It forces a just-in-time QA-capable
editor to the end of a process where it cannot by virtue of that technology and
the practices it entails, impact cost and quality, It forces a double loop
though the val-ver, an increased cognitive load in terms of tools, templates,
skill sets and hands to produce the same information. It does that to force MS
Word and other office tools to the front end of the information flow where they
are least effective.
That’s dumb. “)
Why? S1000D is ONE of a set of technical
information data and namespace (not XML Namespace – the S1000D namespace
ground out by S1000D task analysis. Use them in order, and logistics and
technical information creation and management Just Work. It is a morphological
generator indexing a family of related module types via a weakly typed set of
topical codes (information codes). The advantage is it types the text
requirement for the consumer. XML is consumer oriented regards quality.
SharePoint fights that. Makes it
redundant and awkward. All the while, MS Word is itself, a SharePoint klutz.
Trust the Edit Button? So now a system that claims to be very good at
meta-data driven file management corrupts files. At the most obvious point of
entry for the user.
That’s dumb. “)
I think if as a list too often computer sciency,
we lose focus on process as jobs we know we have to do over the tools we use.
Being XML-Dev, where some of us are tool builders, sellers of tools and so on,
it has traditionally been d飬ass頴o push product. On the other hand, in a
conversation about jobs at hand, that some of us who are tool users have to do
every day, claims made on solutions and Viking boasts have merit. Gather at
the docks and talk cock ups and missions.
IOW, a work focus.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Hunsberger
[mailto:peter.hunsberger@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2013
3:34 PM
To: Hans-Juergen Rennau
Cc: Kurt Cagle; Steve Newcomb;
xml-dev@lists.xml.org; David Lee
Subject: Re: The
Information Interchange Profession (was: XML As Fall Guy)
In my opinion, the concepts of nodes
(= location + content) and path expressions (= navigation between nodes) are
fundamental to IT, so fundamental that their understanding should be required
from a person regarding himself as an IT professional.
Once more; this is graph theory and graph traversal,
it's a well defined part of Computer Science with extensive underlying
mathematical principles. I'm not sure that means all IT professionals
need to understand it. I've worked with many great UI and UX pros and
many Business Analysts who really have no need of it. However, if you are
doing anything that touches algorithms then yes you need to at least know the
basics. If you're designing data structures you should at least know what
differentiates a graph from something that is not a graph and why that matters
(ie; relational databases vs. key value stores). Unfortunately the
reality is that this stuff is pretty abstract and hard to teach. Bridging
the gap from the pure theoretical to the hands on building of programs that are
used to teach computer languages isn't really done. We've touched on it
previously before on the list, but to me this is the dividing line between
"programmers" and Computer Scientists. I don't think you always
need the latter, but I do agree that the world in general needs to know the
difference and why it matters.
|
[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
RSS 2.0 |
|
Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats,
enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.
|
Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website.
they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please
click here.
|
|