[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> Are you suggesting that technical discussion is beside the point?
I think the complexity of the 2nd generation Recs is alarming most people.
It's not just a datatype discussion, since namespaces evoke similar debates.
Take namespaces. In SAX2, a new parameter was introduced, along with 2
interdependent configuration flags that affect those parameters. Of the four
possible configuration settings, only three are valid. Plus, I keep needing
to refer to a book or website to remember precisely what the effects of
setting those flags are.
One could say, "well, it's your job". Yeah, okay: I get to be SAX2 expert,
along with Java expert, along with SQL expert, along with ORDBMS expert,
along with XML expert, along with XML Schema expert, etc., etc., etc.
Eventually, I cease to be expert at anything, because none of the tools I
use are simple. Some of the problems I have are simple, but I can't seem to
find simple tools anymore.
Shoot, I even have this problem at home. My wife has a brakelight that can
only be accessed by removing a cover attached by torx head screws. Well, I
have one of those replaceable head screwdrivers. But no torx head. So I go
to the store. I can buy two torx heads of different sized packaged together
for $5. Or, for $6, I can by a ratchet multi-head screwdriver with swivel
action. Well, of course I buy the latter. And, it has a torx (in addition to
five others)! What a deal!
So, I go home, replace the bulb. But I just spent $6, wasted time and gas,
just because some dimbulb engineer decided a phillips head screw just wasn't
the ticket. No, had to be torx. And now I have relatively a complex tool to
handle standard screws in easily accessible places. And it's great, but
eventually the rachet will break, the swivel won't swivel, and the kids will
lose all those replaceable screw heads. But my old phillips will still work
until the day I die.
So what's the point? Hell, I don't know. But it was an entertaining story,
though, wasn't it?
> On the topic at hand, I thought the fundamental issue was the lack of
> scenarios or clear examples that illustrate the point. That's
> why I keep
> pushing at that level.
And I apologize if I was hijacking the thread. I'm differently
attention-span enabled, in case you couldn't tell.
|
