[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Steve Ballmer is cracking up
- From: Sanjay Sharma <leoaugust@yahoo.com>
- To: Ken North <ken_north@compuserve.com>, xml-dev@lists.xml.org,veillard@redhat.com, tbray@textuality.com
- Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 16:55:14 -0400
Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
wrote
... he hollered (but
then he always hollers) "XML IS BIGGER
THAN THE GUI! BIGGER THAN THE PC!
_________________
I think the situation is
completely the reverse.
- GUI is bigger than
XML.
- And, GUI is bigger than
the PC.
- And, PC is bigger
than XML (because it would be hard to implement XML efficiently without a
Digital Computer).
The reason is simple. GUI
is a frame work for "doing" programming. Compared to the Character Based
programming, Graphical (icons, windows, etc.) Based programming is more
powerful, esp.. for small problems. But then aren't all problems
small?
Further, instead of
applying the concepts of XML to Characters, when the same concepts are
applied to Graphical Objects the implementation is much more powerful and
intuitively satisfying. And there is not much tweaking that needs to be done to
the "XML framework" to handle "graphical" objects compared to Character Based
Objects.
I have written a Ph.D. and
in May 2001 defended this concept at North Carolina State University. As
part of thesis we have created a device called the
Sharma-Winchester Machine (akin to the Turing Machine) that "is based on
the Graphical User Interface in preference to the Character User Interfaces,
uses standard folders and files (esp.. archives like zip files that can save the
path information about files), and is based on a hierarchical storage
design." "The Machine can help the managers deal with structured and
unstructured data, and add structure to unstructured data by an iterative
process."
The underlying concept may
be thought of as "GUI framework mapped to XML framework."
If anyone is
interested please let me know. I would love Red Hat to make something out of it,
though SAS would be in a stronger position to do so.
Thanks,
Sanjay.