Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: "Tatu Saloranta" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,<email@example.com>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Have JDOM / XOM / etc. failed? If so, why?
- From: "Bullard, Claude L \(Len\)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 14:07:42 -0500
- Thread-index: AcZY4f8H/36Zc9hbQ96Z/o81ucxP9wAAGw8Q
- Thread-topic: [xml-dev] Have JDOM / XOM / etc. failed? If so, why?
Until Gresham's Law comes into play. Then you really
might want to differentiate good and bad. Mike's
question in that sense comes down to asking if DOM
is bad driving out good. That is essentially what
you are saying: as long as the developers keep
The committed minority drive innovation. That is
the notion behind "XML was invented by the losers".
Note that 3D on the Web has been said to be dead
but that has no impact on the popularity of Second Life.
Values in a feedback loop with an amplifying function
increase without limit until another function intervenes.
Data tensors.... a real time system of functions over
a value space (manifold) has an absolute limit that determines
the maximum load before distortion. I conjecture (and
I'm not a mathematician) that the value is a tensor.
When analyzing or predicting situations in terms of
measurable semantics, try applying tensor operations.
From: Tatu Saloranta [mailto:email@example.com]
Things still work out ok. I will be more productive,
and even more so relatively speaking: if one wants to
use swiss pocketknife with screws (... or hammer), no
problem; I'll be ok with choosing screwdriver instead.
Like Len said, popularity contest does not need to be
the only game in town. Less popular can be better
("millons of flies"), the correlation between goodness
and popularity is quite weak.