[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: different communities
- From: "Simon St.Laurent" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 11:35:41 -0500
At 05:11 PM 2/9/01 +0100, you wrote:
>Take this notion of local and global, and map that to my different
>encoding levels. I claim that data can have several encoding levels. I
>claim that at any level there is interpretation.
Of course there is intepretation. I just lack any interest in mapping it
to _your_ belief in 'data having several encoding levels', as if the data
is separate from what we do with it.
>Words do not have meaning, people give meaning to words.
>Can we agree on that?
That people give meaning to words, yes. That this contributes in any way
to your argument, no.
>Words, tags, characters. These are all just different symbol packages.
>Different interpretation levels.
>If we want to communicate we have to restrict interpretation (and thus
And I'm afraid that's where the breakdown takes place. You seem to believe
(from prior messages) that meaning can be fixed in some useful way. I
disagree, and I'm not inclined to be convinced. Nor am I certain that
general arguments about the nature of meaning are appropriate to xml-dev.
>Apparently in the real world we are able to do this reasonably well. Good
>enough at least to get some things done consistently. The more we restrict
>interpretation, the more precise we can communicate.
But that restriction is performed on a case-by-case basis. I have very
different interpretations of the word 'router' when used on XML-Dev and
when used on a woodworking forum, for instance.
>Now my question to you was/is: at what level do you see a *critical* problem
>for the viability of general markup language?
>Apparently you did spot a problem, and this is very valuable feedback.
>But please identify the problem. What is the problem? Why is it critical?
>Then if we need to solve it, we need to restrict interpretation at some
No, we need to let people develop their own systems for restricting
interpretation. This isn't something 'we' as a general community need to
do. I'd suggest that we stop trying to identify and solve problems
>There is always a price to pay, I'd like to know if it's worth paying.
Prices to pay, taxes to impose, sometimes worth paying, sometimes not.
If you want to continue this meta-discussion, I'd suggest we take it
offlist and let the developers get back to work.