Re: [xml-dev] RE: XML is Like a Box of Chocolates

[Mike Sokolov <sokolov@ifactory.com>]

hm e-mail

On 03/06/2012 08:48 AM, cbullard@hiwaay.net wrote:
> And not in a world full of rtf controls, pngs, bmps, tiffs, and so on.
>
> Panglossian.
>
> len
>
> Quoting David Lee <dlee@calldei.com>:
>
>> So you've tossed plain text and multimedia (audio, video etc) as useful?
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad (excuse the terseness)
>> David A Lee
>> dlee@calldei.com<mailto:dlee@calldei.com>
>>
>>
>> On Mar 5, 2012, at 7:59 PM, "Kurt Cagle" 
>> <kurt.cagle@gmail.com<mailto:kurt.cagle@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Bruce,
>>
>> I like Jenni Tennisons notion that we are moving to an infrastructure 
>> in which all data moves over one of four formats: html (rich text), 
>> xml (documents), json (data structures) and rdf (assertions), with 
>> the caveat that rdf's preferred format is turtle notation. It's an 
>> intriguing thought.
>>
>> Kurt Cagle
>>
>> On Mar 5, 2012 5:52 PM, "Cox, Bruce" 
>> <Bruce.Cox@uspto.gov<mailto:Bruce.Cox@uspto.gov>> wrote:
>> Roger L. Costello, your tombstone will be labeled "The Great 
>> Provocateur" and carved in the shape of a Valrhona Truffle.  How dare 
>> you refer to the contents of a box of chocolate as "meaningless!"
>>
>> Of course, the organization and processing of content is HIGHLY 
>> MEANINGFUL, even if only to the businesses that invest in its XML 
>> representation.  Do you suppose that the idea of organization is 
>> somehow a fiction used to seduce those with money to give it to those 
>> who play with pointy brackets?  Granted, I've seen similar tactics 
>> used to milk DARPA funding, but we aren't all so mercenary.
>>
>> Kidding aside (yes, that was actually intended to be a joke, so 
>> please don't anyone take it seriously), I think you've swung the 
>> pendulum too far to the abstract with this analogy, Roger.  If there 
>> is meaning in XML, it's in the content, not the syntax.  But if there 
>> is a right way to process the content, that process is guided by the 
>> markup.  The markup lubricates that special part of the business 
>> process that can be reduced to symbol processing.  If there is one 
>> paramount constraint on that processing, it is that it must not 
>> violate the meaning invested in the content by the content owners.  
>> Believe me, that's a trick worth performing, and paying for.
>>
>> However, I think your analogy is worth developing.  It will certainly 
>> hold the attention of your readers.  And consider a role for wrapping 
>> paper.
>>
>> Somewhat off topic: Which brings to mind a program on Science channel 
>> (How it's Done?  Mega factories?) that showed a major UPS sorting 
>> center.  Bar codes were used for most packages to move them from the 
>> flight they arrived on to the loading dock of the flight or truck 
>> they were leaving on.  But not all.  Very large or small packages got 
>> sorted using other methods, usually requiring manual intervention to 
>> a greater or lesser degree.  XML, like bar codes, will cover a wide 
>> range of processing, but not all cases.
>>
>> Bruce B Cox
>> OCIO/AED/Software Architecture and Engineering Division
>> 571-272-9004<tel:571-272-9004>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Costello, Roger L. 
>> [mailto:costello@mitre.org<mailto:costello@mitre.org>]
>> Sent: 2012 March 4, Sunday 09:06
>> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org<mailto:xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
>> Subject: XML is Like a Box of Chocolates
>>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> XML is like a box of chocolates.
>>
>> Here's how:
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> Organize the Chocolates that I Received
>> --------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Recently I received some chocolates:
>>
>> -  Truffles, I put them in a box and wrote on the outside of the box 
>> "Spherical"
>> -  M&Ms, I put them in another box and wrote on the outside of that 
>> box, "Shiny"
>> -  Chocolate covered peanuts, I received a lot so I divided them into 
>> two boxes and wrote on the outside of each box, "Nutty"
>>
>> I stacked the boxes like so: Spherical on top of Shiny on top of the 
>> two Nutty.
>>
>> Then I took this stack and put them all inside a box and wrote on the 
>> outside of that box, "Chocolates"
>>
>> Oh, I also received a chocolate bar which I hooked on top of the 
>> "Chocolates" box.
>>
>> See how I organized the chocolates?
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> What's the Meaning of that Organization of Chocolates?
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> I hooked the chocolate bar on top of the "Chocolates" box. Is there 
>> some special significance to that?
>>
>> I placed the two "Nutty" boxes on the bottom of the stack. Is there 
>> some special significance to that?
>>
>> What's the meaning of this organization?
>>
>> Obviously it has no meaning. It is simply the way I organized my 
>> chocolates. To attach meaning to this organization is assigning 
>> meaning where none exists.
>>
>> XML is like this organization of chocolates. An XML document is just 
>> a collection of data where each item of data has been boxed (enclosed 
>> in start-tag, end-tag pairs) or hooked onto a box (attribute). There 
>> is no meaning to the organization.
>>
>> ----------------------------
>> Eating the Chocolates
>> ----------------------------
>>
>> Today I ate a truffle. When I eat a truffle I like to take my time 
>> and enjoy it, so I bite off just a tiny piece, let it sit in my mouth 
>> until it melts, and then swallow it; then repeat with the next tiny 
>> bite.
>>
>> My brother, on the other hand, pops the entire truffle into his 
>> mouth, chews on it for a few seconds, and swallows it.
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> What's the Right Way to Eat Chocolates?
>> --------------------------------------------------
>>
>> I eat chocolates in a different way than my brother. Am I right and 
>> he's wrong?
>>
>> Obviously not. We are each entitled to eat chocolates however we desire.
>>
>> I should mention that I eat brussel sprouts differently than I eat 
>> chocolates. For brussel sprouts I pop one into my mouth, quickly 
>> chew, and swallow. So if I were doing a blind taste test of various 
>> foods, it would be hard for me to know how to eat each food.
>>
>> I need to know "what" I am eating to know "how" to eat it.
>>
>> Analogously, there is no right way to process XML.  To each his own. 
>> What is important, however, is to know "what" the data is.
>>
>> -------------------------------
>> Giving Gifts of Chocolate
>> -------------------------------
>>
>> I think chocolates are a great gift. So last Christmas I gave a box 
>> of chocolates to each of my siblings.
>>
>> Earlier I described an organization of chocolates. I used that as a 
>> template. For each sibling I made a box of chocolates following that 
>> template. That is, to be placed within each "Chocolates" box are:
>>
>> -  1 box containing truffles
>> -  1 box containing M&Ms
>> -  2 boxes containing chocolate covered peanuts.
>>
>> And hooked onto the "Chocolates" box is a chocolate bar.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------
>> What's the Meaning of this Template?
>> ------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Does the template give meaning to the gift boxes?
>>
>> Obviously not. The template simply shows "how to" organize the boxes 
>> (or, once accomplished, how each box is organized).
>>
>> Likewise, XML Schema (and Relax NG and DTD) just show "how to" 
>> organize data in XML documents. Schemas have no meaning.
>>
>> ---------
>> Recap
>> ---------
>>
>> An XML document is just an organization of data. Organization has no 
>> meaning. Be careful that you don't implicitly assign meaning where 
>> none exists. For example, XML attributes are not "meta-data" and they 
>> have no "scope". Analogously, it would be foolhardy to claim that 
>> because the chocolate bar is hooked onto the "Chocolates" box it is 
>> somehow "meta-chocolate" and it "scopes" all the chocolates inside 
>> the box.
>>
>> XML documents can be processed any way you want. There is no right 
>> way. Don't prescribe "how" to process data. However, do describe 
>> "what" the data is. But don't depend on the element or attribute 
>> names to describe "what" the data is. I labeled the box containing 
>> the M&Ms "Shiny", that hardly tells "what" is inside the box. 
>> Describe "what" the data is using a data specification and possibly 
>> an ontology.
>>
>> XML Schema (and Relax NG and DTD) are just templates that describe 
>> how to organize XML documents. Schemas have no meaning.
>>
>> -------------------------
>> Related Discussions
>> -------------------------
>>
>> The Edge of Chaos: Where Syntax Ends and Interpretation Begins 
>> (http://www.xfront.com/The-edge-of-chaos-where-syntax-ends-and-interpretation-begins.pdf) 
>>
>>
>> The XML Literalist 
>> (http://www.stylusstudio.com/xmldev/201103/post90060.html)
>>
>> Comments?
>>
>> /Roger
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
> to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
> spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
>
> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
> Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org
> subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org
> List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
>