[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
james.anderson@setf.de (james anderson) writes:
>who is arguing to throw anything away?
You're discarding human-readable markup in favor of computer-readable
but otherwise gibberish labels. That seems not to be a loss to you.
>i'm asking whether an authority
>is going to be able to depend on documents in which its data depends
>on someone elses. i'm asking, what belongs where?
>From my perspective, the authority should be fed what it needs when it
wants it, if those doing the feeding care how it responds. If you have
enough power to force your correspondents to submit their information in
such a form, great. You're doing them a disservice while avoiding an
extremely simple transformation on your end, but hey - if you have the
power and that's how you want to architect things, that's what you'll
do.
>and suggesting that, whether one admits it or not, insisting on the
>blanket redundancy is the equivalent of sitting in front of a pile of
>fan-fold with a very blunt pencil. a very large pile.
Better a pile of fan fold with intelligibly labeled columns than a pile
of cryptic codes that require constant reference to another explanation.
As for the pencil, there are these things called pencil sharpeners. A
penknife will do in a pinch.
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org
|
