Lists Home |
Date Index |
> The web described by Joe Gregorio has nothing to do with XML and
> everything to do with buyers & sellers agreeing on shared semantics
> and manipulating Google to become their global marketplace.
I didn't get any sense from Paul Ford's piece or Joe's piece that
"manipulating Google" was necessary. Shared semantics, sure, but I do
keep reading about XML lets people focus on such things without
investing huge amounts of time in syntax, or even in new tools.
> on shared semantics is the crux of the matter not whether XML, RDF or
> whatever fashionable markup buzzword is of interest to you.
Yeah, it's all just information. I just can't figure out why Microsoft
keeps talking about XML all the time, when XML and RDF are really the
same thing, and we all need relational datatypes in our markup.
> Manipulating Google in the manner described is already possible
> today, the question is whether Google will stnad for it since they
> are known to hand tweak their algorithms if necessary to change
> undesirable results.
Again, in Paul Ford's piece, there's this nice paragraph:
Finally, Google realized they could grab a cut on the ³Web of Trust²
idea by offering their own verification and rating service, $15 a year
to answer a questionnaire, have your credit checked, and fill in some
bank account information. But people signed up, because Google was the
marketplace; the Google seal of approval meant more than the
> What does web services have to do with anything???
In this case, it struck me that the model Joe proposes is, as he
acknowledges, "very RESTian", and fits very nicely into the existing Web
without the need for whole extra stacks of envelopes, headers, etc. on
top of what's pretty simple XML.
In general, however, the question "what does web services have to do
with anything???" seems like a good one.
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:220.127.116.11.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether