[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Again, sure. That makes perfect sense.
However, I like boring systems that don't want to interpret things. And reading the examples in the original post, this is what I assume the author is going for. It brings up units, for example, and mismatches in product descriptions (aperture and f-stop). These are very good questions for people doing data integration projects to be aware of.
Patrick
-----Original Message-----
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@simonstl.com]
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 2:33 PM
To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Categories of Mismatches between Producer
andConsumer?
At 02:23 PM 7/11/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>I agree with you completely. However, if you are interested in a framework
>for what needs to be negotiated (by intelligent parties) before systems
>are built, then, IMHO, Roger's categories are right on.
>
>Social context is a very good one. Reading the title of the original post,
>I saw Producer as a machine and Consumer as a machine. Your interpretation
>might vary :-)
Machines have gotten a lot cheaper and a lot smarter. My interpretation
varies because I give the machines (and their programmers) more credit for
capabilities which include negotiation and interpretation, and all the
"social" contexts which go with that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
