Re: [xml-dev] XML-DEV list

["andrew welch" <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com>]

On 9/28/06, Len Bullard <cbullard@hiwaay.net> wrote:
> Force is the feedback effect over time of the naïve indices in use.  You may
> have missed earlier discussions on this list of the ease with which Google
> can be gamed.  All inbound-linking systems that scale out of some boundary
> share that characteristic without filtering controls.  One of those is
> vetting assertions against other assertions with time-variant properties or
> restricting the domain of the citation (eg, inverted indices restrict the
> domain to the book; library cards restrict it to the book title, author,
> date, etc; cross-domain indices make no assertions beyond location, and so
> on).  Google knows exactly what I am talking about.  They don't like to talk
> about it.  The idea that a Google search returns an authoritative assertion
> is not an idea they endorse; naïve users do that for them.
>
> ><rant>
> >Sorry to be blunt Len, but my problem with some of your posts is the
> >sheer amount of noise.
>
> See above.

I take it that's a joke (I smiled anyway).

"All inbound-linking systems that scale out of some boundary share
that characteristic without filtering controls."

I could quote some more but the entire paragraph makes for impossible
reading.  The points you make could change my opinion, you could be
saying absolute gold - I just can't distill it down into something
comprehensible.

I guess its time I went back to quietly ignoring your posts, but just
before I do:

> 2.  Adding more semantics to CSS bloats the browser.
> 3.  Bloating the browser may be a good tradeoff if authors are more
   productive or interoperability improves.  The first is likely but the
   second is not.

Thats subjective isn't it?  If the rules weren't in CSS but in a
separate XML file the browser would still need to parse that file.  If
XML were used for that link file, then its likely this would be larger
than the equivalent in CSS, causing even more "bloat".  Equally the
browser would then need to contain some kind of Link engine to process
that XML file, along with its CSS engine.  Is that too bloaty?  Maybe
if we dropped the Flash and SVG plugins, the google toolbar, the rss
reader, the weather extension,  the videodownloader.. it could slim up
a little and make room for links in CSS - and maybe make us all a
little more productive.

Anyway...