[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: XML word processors and the SW (was Re: First Order Logic .. .)
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: John Turnbull <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:41:03 -0500
Title: RE: XML word processors and the SW (was Re: First Order Logic ...)
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
leg, trust. In some domains, (not security where trust
much more definite meaning), trust entails the willingness
engage beyond the acceptance of competence. For humans,
assert the critical factors are emotional and that without
model for emotions that is shared across the Semantic
we have an interoperability issue for agents that goes
the editing suite.
Some duck this stuff as mushy, touchy feely, not science.
isn't science. It is art. It is where the computer programmer
becomes inadequate and the actor takes over. It is often
case that the critical skill in the enterprise design is
awareness of the emotional factors of the agents
must cooperate and negotiate.
was a terrible president. He was a so-so actor.
combination of power and mediocre talent made
one looks at the applications of a DTD, one should
consider the DTD in isolation, but as a family of schemata
process context in a goal context. Schemas are part
ecology of communicating entities. Viewed as such,
topic is open to schematization. With the capacity of
adaptation to the schema, one can then model appropriateness.
these things are possible.
without the human emotional modeling, the critical
question "who sez?" is often answered by "who
sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
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.