RE: XML word processors and the SW (was Re: First Order Logic .. .)

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

Title: RE: XML word processors and the SW (was Re: First Order Logic ...)

We can use the DTD or schema to automate and amplify the competence of the

user.  For the Semantic Web, it will also be critical to build on the

second leg, trust.   In some domains, (not security where trust

has a much more definite meaning), trust entails the willingness

to engage beyond the acceptance of competence.  For humans,

some assert the critical factors are emotional and that without

some model for emotions that is shared across the Semantic

Net, we have an interoperability issue for agents that goes

beyond the editing suite. 

 

Some duck this stuff as mushy, touchy feely, not science.

It isn't science.  It is art.   It is where the computer programmer

becomes inadequate and the actor takes over.  It is often

the case that the critical skill in the enterprise design is

acute awareness of the emotional factors of the agents

that must cooperate and negotiate.

 

Reagan was a terrible president.  He was a so-so actor. 
But the combination of power and mediocre talent made

him an excellent leader.  

 

When one looks at the applications of a DTD, one should

not consider the DTD in isolation, but as a family of schemata

in a process context in a goal context.  Schemas are part

of the ecology of communicating entities.   Viewed as such,

any topic is open to schematization.  With the capacity of

adaptation to the schema, one can then model appropriateness.

All these things are possible.

 

But without the human emotional modeling, the critical

question "who sez?" is often answered by "who cares?"

Len
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

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

-----Original Message-----
From: John Turnbull [mailto:jturnbull@softquad.com]

I believe you are proposing a way to automate the creation of DTDs. My intuition says that useful authoring DTDs express ideas that are, so far, too difficult for practical algorithms to create.

However, once you have the DTD, the question is not "Should I offer to the author a set of semantics and content rules?", but rather "Should I require that the author be constrained within the limits of a model during the writing process?" Most authors answer No. Almost everyone who bears the cost of document processing answers Yes.

You ask about Microsoft. They have considered the semantics issue deeply and they have addressed their need with XMetaL. Microsoft purchased an enterprise license for XMetaL and is making widespread use of it in some very interesting ways.

Fortunately, there is something in it for authors too. The model, in addition to constraint,  offers a structure on which useful programmatic behaviors can be created for use during authoring. There are hardly any documents, at least in the business world, whose creation cannot be facilitated by partial automation. That's the major economic driver behind the use of XML for rich content and Microsoft's decision to purchase an authoring tool that is also a developer's platform.