[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Joe English <jenglish@flightlab.com> writes:
> As for reordering elements, the best practice is to
> design the architecture so that, to the extent
> possible, it's never necessary.
Yes.
The Architectural Forms paradigm is strictly for people
who *want* to cooperate with their various communities,
but who can't base their cooperation on the strictest
kind of adherence to a single monolithic document type.
The benefits of AF-based cooperation include:
* the supportability of business models based on
architecture-specific semantic processing engines,
and
* the ability to distribute limited authority to
enhance and embellish the common information
architecture that reflects the consensual basis of
community-wide cooperation.
When people *don't* want to cooperate with each other,
we can always fall back on the nuclear weapons of the
industry: groves/property sets, and arbitrary
transformations. To these, resistance is futile, but
communities miss opportunities to achieve deliberate
consensus and to gain bargaining power for themselves
that will come in very handy when they purchase
infrastructural information technologies specialized
for their common needs.
Alas, most communities are still too ignorant and/or
too fractious to reap these rewards. Even so, I think
it's a good idea for XML to provide a basis whereby the
enlightened can benefit. It might tend to improve the
odds of cooperation, which would improve human
productivity, which would benefit all of us, one way or
another.
-- Steve
Steven R. Newcomb, Consultant
srn@coolheads.com
voice: +1 972 359 8160
fax: +1 972 359 0270
1527 Northaven Drive
Allen, Texas 75002-1648 USA
|
