Lists Home |
Date Index |
I realize that, but I've never been able to
find a way to stop a stampeding herd. If it
is following a leader, then at least that
is the person who's direction can be changed.
The W3C has a Director. At various times, I
have come down hard on that position, but an
honest fellow holds it. Start there.
But keep that sig post of your's in mind too.
Overengineered and overrequired aren't the
same thing. Consider that "blind interoperability"
of a complex system is a hefty order. First,
why has it become complex? Skip the political
reasons; we know about ambition and marketing.
What technical requirements have lead to the
complex morass of interlocking specifications?
People keep telling me to read Wolfram's new
book and I should. On the other hand, I think
we know a lot about this already. Simple
systems that feedback into their own systems
for modifying themselves tend to become
complex and brittle.
What jobs would be impossible without
strongly-typed XML applications? What
would require merely another technology?
How many of those jobs are we already
doing without strongly-typed XML applications?
Sure, "SGML IS HARD" was just propaganda
and it still is. But something that really
is hard won't fare much better. Stew left
to stew goes bad fast.
From: Marcus Carr [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Technical blunder as it may be, there is no question that the existence
of the other bits and pieces can and will lead those not brave or
experienced enough into a morass of over-engineering.
Remember the "SGML is too hard" mantra of a few years ago? Despite the
protestations of those of us who were using SGML at the time, it caught
on like wildfire. Because it was true? No, because it was "the message".
Well the message now is that everything fits together, and that a tidy
implementation follows the sanctioned path. Of course the add-ons are
really optional, but how do new developers (or anyone else) know when to
stop or divert? Nobody ever gets fired for following the W3C...
Never mind what's right - it's more important to think about what the
developer community may be lead into believing. I'm with Simon - all is
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."