RE: XML Spaghetti (Was Re: XML spec dependencies chart --)

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

Simple.   The changes to specs begin to slow down in some cases

to imperceptible, looks like rigor, motion.   The dependencies among

the small components slow the evolution of each component.  Specs

and standards are not API-enabled software, so that comparison

doesn't work.  They are contracts and if visibility into each is required

by the others, encapsulation breaks.

 

This is why it is problematic to declare minimal victories.  To get

progress after that, one ends up having to start a new and different

fight under an assumed name.  So now not only spaghetti, but

cold spaghetti.

Complexity is perceptual.  That is why architecture is not an

experimental artform.

Len

http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h

-----Original Message-----
From: AndrewWatt2000@aol.com [mailto:AndrewWatt2000@aol.com]

If XML was designed to be "simple", or at least simpler than SGML, how is
that we have arrived so soon at this XML Spaghetti? If your perception of
exponential growth is correct, and I suspect it is, the tangle of XML
Spaghetti can only become more daunting with time.

Andrew Watt