[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com (Uche Ogbuji) writes:
>> There is - or should be - a lot of room for markup applications
>> without the "Knowledge Technology" claims piling on.
>
>To be fair there is - or should be - a lot of room for data processing
>applications without the markup claims piling on.
If you're going to use markup, you need to think about markup. If
you're doing data processing and don't give a damn about markup, there's
probably something better than markup out there you should be using.
I'm not using knowledge technologies, so I don't feel obligated to think
about them. If I start working in OWL or anything heavy-duty in RDF,
I'd feel obligated.
The kinds of labels used in XML don't require such theory, IMHO. While
it's helpful to understand the relational calculus to normalize data for
storage in relational databases, there's also a level where you can do
normalization (I call it "information demolition") without ever getting
into the calculus.
Hell, I don't think we've begun to figure out what we can do with the
syntax. Rushing forward into semantic theory seems really premature.
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org
|
