[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
igraham@ic-unix.ic.utoronto.ca (Ian Graham) writes:
>Of course in the organic world, mutatations are mostly failures, and
>die off. Project managers seem to want higher probability of success
>(at least on the timeframe of the project) ;-) .
In the biological world, yes. In the human world, not necessarily. We
have a lot better track record than random DNA changes.
>> For the most part, though, I continue to hear "XML is an okay
>> syntax, but still we must all agree on semantics precisely for
>> anything to work", the same dispiriting story that's kept complexity
>> as a barrier to sophisticated computing.
>
>No one wants to have they app crash for lack of handling some obscure
>content model -- and I've certainly seen that happen a lot on the
>project I'm working on. I
Then write the apps so they don't crash when fed something they don't
understand. Responding with "I don't understand this" is a good first
step.
>We need to make sure people use the 'right' approaches for processing
>xml, so this doesn't happen. Unfortunately this is a different mindset
>for designers and developers ...
What would this "right" approach be? The semantic straitjacket?
|
