[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
And one has to deal with the issue that miscommunication
is also useful and purposeful. One problem of making
things "easy" with "worse is better" solutions such as
HTML and HTTP, is that discipline is not enforced by
the system, and while some will find that a distasteful
idea, using the system to enforce discipline was the
main argument for XML's draconian parse (clean up
malformed HTML). I wonder how successful that has
been with respect to the legacy of 'worse is better'.
Metadata is like security; it costs to have it and it
costs not to have it. It is useful to do it right
and it is useful to make sure that can't be done.
Without a needs case, it is better to ignore it.
For security, the needs case is now well made.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Gavin Thomas Nicol [mailto:gtn@rbii.com]
What percentage of web sites are ever going to have RDDL or reasonable
metadata? What percentage is necessary to support inference through
metadata propogation over links? My guess is that unless 15% or so of
web sites don't do this, the overall impact will not be great (no
network effect that would be noticeable). Then again, perhaps within
the community that *does* do it, things will be much better.
I'm just thinking that so many things that are obviously good ideas,
are never used by the population at large...
|
