[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: ZDNet Schema article,and hiding complexity within user-friendlyproducts
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: Eric Bohlman <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 08:21:27 -0500
Not necessarily. The problem in all of this
is that using well-formedness as the basis
for all XML applications forced language designs
into the language itself. Now we demand of the
language design the same features we demand of
the document. Yet when we read paragraphs of
the design document as I cited yesterday, they
are targeted to highly specialized, highly trained
readers with very narrow backgrounds. Do you
consider those really "human readable"?
Most of you probably can't or don't decipher
the contracts your companies use to get projects
for you to work on. It takes a lot of practice
to see how even simple on the surface language
leads to complex requirements or open ended non
terminating tasks that bleed every bit of profit
out of your companies. That is why so many of
your companies are failing out there.
The generic appeal to "humanity" while on the
other hand focusing on a very narrow application
of language is silly. We need designs for
language that work in the application environment.
Socialism in engineering is not the way to take
out costs. It builds them back in, it makes them
a permanent expanding feature of the design.
In short, it fails to do anything truly useful.
I can read XML Schemas. I am specialized but moreover,
I have to study. I don't see a lot of you demanding
that Java be "human readable". It is but only by
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Eric Bohlman [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
4/24/01 1:25:49 PM, "Bullard, Claude L (Len)"
>Absolutely. The value for contract-constrained
>communication is the first and best application.
Which strongly implies that human readability and human
writability are among the most important aspects of a schema
language, and that the last thing we want is an "assembly
language" that we expect our tools to hide from us.