[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: is that a fork in the road?
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 14:05:52 -0600
Right. The point I want to make
is that XML and these languages per
se as "simplified" bits required that
long complicated bit that came before
to figure out which bits were simple,
which 20 does what 80 of the work.
We are not forking. We are on the
road we've been in for a long long
time. We are a lot closer to some
goals, and others will always move
as soon as we get to the others.
That is why they pay us the big bucks.
"Playing croquet while stoned can be an extra
beautiful trip. Sometimes you think you are a
member of English aristocracy. Sometimes
you think you are GOD!" - A Child's Garden of Grass
The pipeline idea in the speech (good
speech BTW, I was hoping for visuals)
is the right idea. My rule of thumb
here is if an idea is completely new,
then it has about a 10% chance on this
round. If it is an idea we've seen
before, revised perhaps, cleaner perhaps,
then its viability goes up considerably.
If we are on the fourth or fifth pass,
the idea is too hard or something political
happened and we might want to quickly
get this one done or drop it.
Before we lament the complexity (We are whining!)
or really sidetrack, we can stop and
look at the path we came down (you did
that in the speech) and then see if the
next steps are obvious or not obvious.
Can we safely say:
1. If it fails the parse, it isn't
XML (draconian bases).
2. The base infoSet maps to the
3. Each step afterwards is one
one has to choose. XML Schema
is an obvious step because it adds
What alternative steps for three are there
other than the DTD? What alternative properties
are added in these steps? Then we can
get around to naming the steps.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h