[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Doug Rudder wrote:
> > Tim Bray responded:
> >
> > > Too simple I think. Particularly given that almost all of the
> > > advantages of XML over SGML were based on the principle of "leave out
> > > everything except what programmers actually understand and use." -Tim
Consider that XML removed several things that users relied upon.
> Aaron Skonnard Responded:
> >
> > I agree with Tim here and have a hard time seeing how XML is a useful
> > *technology* to anyone but "programmers". Users of "markup" (who are not
> > devs) are simply using pre-defined vocabularies defined by programmers.
I have a deal of sympathy for Simon's perspective. Perhaps the most
verdurous aspect of XML is the way it throws open the doors of the
cathedral, inviting users to partake of the sacrament, much to the
chagrin of the priests bowed before their hex-editors. In fact, but you
have guessed this already, I would not be a developer were it not for
markup. I arrive here via typesetting--the original markup being
proofreader's marks--by way of macro writing, vocabulary development and a
few years of diligent self-study.
>
> This is a two-edged sword that cuts between the document-centric and
> data-centric views of XML. Is an XML instance structured document content or
> a data set? It seems as though the answer could be: both.
I concur. Both/and, but I find it more productive to appreciate markup
applications as an expansion of the idea of a document rather than a
constraint upon the notion of data.
> The idea that markup users "are simply using pre-defined vocabularies
> defined by programmers" is only partially true.
It is little true at all, in my experience. The worst definitions are
those prepared by programmers: either constrained to the point of
frangibility or completely ad-hoc, I've been forced to write against both.
Where it is possible to unite a group of experienced users dedicated to
improving their lot with an informed amanuensis skilled in humane and
arcane disciplines....
> It is true that
> the dev is the one who has to construct the final DTD/Schema
Thank's be that is simply erroneous. Contract schema development *should*
be the most lively field at the moment. Alas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Haarman
mhaarma@socsci.umn.edu
|
