OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] The Best Technologies Don't Win

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Again, sometimes they don't choose.  Their employer chooses a platform.
The platform developer chose the choice.  Or the SOAP committee chooses
the choice.   This is the classic problem of targeting in a space that
is resonant: little islands force repeated orbits.  XSD isn't winning.
XSD has won.  Now it is a matter of market lifecycle (opportunity to
choose repeatedly).

You are exactly right about the 'only horse'.  RELAX was a response, not
a candidate.  That means it was too late.  It was also explained in
terms of 'hedge automata' and not enough people could understand that
fast enough until the examples were given.  Again, intelligence doesn't

Thought experiment:  if the original "DTD plus better data types" target
had been conserved, would one get XSD?  How did it drift into the
complex beastie it is today?  One retargeting decision at a time.

Given enough iterations, the kind of chaotic jump to a different body to
orbit can happen.  What happened with XSD was a Hohmann transfer:
energy traded for time.    The jump to RELAX can happen but it takes
time and a committed group that keeps it alive and in play.  See X3D (no
one can kill it and the biggest companies on the planet tried).

What we are talking about though, is not the 'web' but a 'majority of
developers who consider options' and have the ability to choose.  For
that, they have to have options, yes.  For options to emerge, there has
to be time.  The assumption used politically and wrongly was that
"Internet time favors the first mover".  It does; it isn't an
intelligent choice.  The web favors mediocrity, fast choice and live
with it or don't be In the In Group.   The web actively works against
intelligence because it doesn't have reach.  Odd but so. 

The flaw in the position that "the web" chooses is like the flaw in the
URI as a universal name, or that the only test of a technology is
'humanity benefits' which is another appeal to an abstract universal:
the assumption of universal hegemony, or the right to choose the
choices.   Intelligence is a local effect.  You can use it to target but
to do that you have to trade time for energy.

The critical decision in design is WHEN to get feedback and what kind of
control is used to cull and promote selectors.  See PID controls,
parametric controls, adaptive controls, and limiters.


From: Elliotte Harold [mailto:elharo@metalab.unc.edu] 

Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

> We have XSD because it got the most votes at the time.   It's that
> simple. 

We got XSD because it was the only candidate running. The same people
who developed it were the people who voted on it, and they only got to
vote Yes or No. What did you expect to happen in an election like that?

Now if the competition had not been XSD, yes or no; but XSD or RELAX NG?

And if the people who voted were not themselves the developers of the
languages; then the outcome might have been very different. Indeed
that's exactly what seems to be happening in the marketplace. A strong
majority of developers who actually consider both options are picking
RELAX NG. XSD is winning only with developers who don't know they have a


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS