[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Layering (was RE: Blueberry/Unicode/XML)
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Leigh Dodds <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:31:18 -0500
Sure. You won't like it and I doubt many
here are ready to face up to it.
The problem is SGML On The Web should be
been SGML On The Web. The hacks to make
it simpler made it less applicable. Now
the hacks are being redone and it is to become
XML As SGML. The difference is one
of ownership. A property of the commons
was privatized (process of enclosure)
for "the common good". As noted by David
Bollier, New America Foundation, "Public
Assets, Private Profits", this is similar
to the processes by which much of England's
public lands were privatized for the purpose
of the profits of a few landowners. He also compares
it to the patenting of human genetic codes,
and the privatizing of water access rights
by companies such as Vivendi ("the wars of
the 21st century will be over water").
Has information become an "alienable right"?
The tragicomic aspect of that is how it was
done by a small self-selected group of
individuals who talk a lot about open software,
processes, etc., but whose actions resulted
in the irreversible enclosure of a public standard
for exchanging information without compromising
it to the predations of local systems. Now,
we are the predators.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Leigh Dodds [mailto:email@example.com]
If its the latter it appears (to me at least) as if its being driven
by an increasing distance from the SGML heritage, and the need to
deal with, and rationalise, the number of additional specifications being
built upon the XML foundations.