Lists Home |
Date Index |
Your answers are the type of answer I'm used to seeing when someone brings up the "data vs. document" debate that I consider meaningless.
Data that a computer can process vs. data that a human can process? So are there people who utilize XML without the benefit of a computer doing some processing? Or are there places where XML documents are processed and never have to be viewed by a human?
PS: I'd like to say thanks to the people who brought up the meaningful distinctions such as the tendency to eschew mixed content in data-centric uses of XML.
From: Jonathan Robie [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Fri 6/6/2003 11:48 AM
To: Dare Obasanjo; Martin Soukup; Simon St.Laurent; email@example.com
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] YAML Ain't Markup Language
At 10:51 AM 6/6/2003 -0700, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
>I often here folks on XML-DEV talk about the distinction between
>data-centric vs. document-centric uses of XML yet I've always failed to
>see how these uses of XML are at loggerheads. This now seems to me to be
>the typical XML-DEV posturing the advance an agenda.
Data is information that a computer can process. A document is information
that I can process.
>Does anyone have any concrete differences between such uses of XML that
>require such divisive terms as "doc vs data people".
Sure. A document person is someone who doesn't appreciate the significance
of using XML for data. A data person is someone who doesn't appreciate the
significance of using XML for documents intended for humans. You can
usually identify a document person when he calls someone else a datahead.
You can usually identify a data person when he calls someone else a dochead.
Then there are the XML people, who understand the significance of XML for
both documents and data.