Lists Home |
Date Index |
I am not sure if I am bending the original intent wildly out context-- but
being a first year poetry student these issues came up for me this year as
well. As we studied the critical notion of intertextuality (treating a poem
as a work vs. a text) I couldn't help but draw the comparisson between XML
as data and XML as the model. Of course at the time I was more focused on
studying the large community rift centered around differing notions of the
document vs. the Infoset.
There seems a great similarity-- as the critical school moved away from
treating poems as works which have a stable meaning-- or answer, if you
will-- the nature of poetic criticism changed and the readership widened. It
seems in the XML community there are two distinct poles-- XML as data with a
stable meaning (object serialization / schema / infoset items) and XML as a
changing document where the language itself carries semantic value. Maybe
this is the general nature of philosophy or science now. I am not sure--
such a dichotomy exists in many fields why not in XML, why not in poetry?
Maybe this is why Whitman is revered-- but then again many of his poems were
written as works which could be resolved-- only now do we realize the value
of viewing the poems against alternate contexts where the resolution is made
fuzzy-- no one realized it while he was alive.
XML Development and Developer Web Hosting