OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: designers as users etc.

Yes, parsing a well-formed instance is the exception 
by definition.  Unfortunately, that is almost a 
trivial exception since all the interesting stuff 
happens after that and the hubris of the XML designers 
is that the lexical parsing does anything interesting 
even if required.

As your citation notes, the notion that the user should be involved in the 
design has been at the forefront of rapid app development 
for some time, in the design methodologies for getting 
requirements and stating them rigorously, has been 
the devil in the details of these methods and most 
attempts to bridge subject domains and program design 
with rigorous specification language right down to the 
notions of executable specifications.  The other path 
has been scripted systems such as VB that brought programming 
within the reach of the largely untrained novice programmer. 
All of this stuff works but still leads to a subject matter 
expert building their own system.  What is HTML but a means 
to convince a subject matter expert that they can code?

At the end of the day, its negotiation and cost over tools 
we have to expect to be adequate.  Then someone tells us 
it's too slow, not trendy, not this month's flavor.  The 
great hope of XML design is that when that happens, we 
can get the data out of the system and onto the new thing 
without too much trouble or information loss.


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

-----Original Message-----
From: Simon "St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@simonstl.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 9:36 AM
To: Bullard, Claude L (Len)
Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: RE: designers as users etc.

On 12 Jun 2001 09:24:21 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> I'm not sure what the conclusion here is:
> o Only programmers should use systems
> o Only users should program systems
> and then how that translates to XML where
> o Any one can write an instance
> o Only some programs can process some instances
> What is the point exactly?

The point is that bringing users closer to the design process can
improve the design on multiple levels.  Also, the value of iterative
development and maximum flexbility in the course of such design.

The claim that "only some programs can process some instances" is true
because we've let it be true.  On some levels - XML parsing - it's
largely false.  XML seems to me to be an opportunity to get beyond that
painfully narrow (but supposedly easy) vision of information processing.