RE: [xml-dev] hypermedia affordances

["Len Bullard" <Len.Bullard@ses-i.com>]

Thanks for clarifying that, John.  That sounds like a good thing
although the "sometimes not" part gives me the same feeling as that the
quote from marca did way back yonder (so what the heck are NOTATIONs
good for?)

I think, Peter, you have been answered authoritatively regards MicroXML.


As to the last question, because something had to spawn objectivists and
teach cosmetics.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: John Cowan [mailto:cowan@ccil.org] On Behalf Of John Cowan
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 3:08 PM
To: Len Bullard
Cc: Rushforth, Peter; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] hypermedia affordances

Len Bullard scripsit:

> That is usually the problem of a one size fits all, but because I am
> not involved with HTML5 nor do I understand its raison d'etre, I defer
> to those who are and do.  Noodling is the royal road to innovation
> but with Google and Apple slugging it out in court, I am unsure of
> what will become of HTML5.

HTML5 is two things at the same time.  On the one hand, it adds new
features to HTML 4, some of them already implemented in major browsers,
some not.  This is evolutionary.  On the other hand, it specifies in
painstaking detail, to the level of actual software (but written in
highly
technical English, like a verbalized flowchart), exactly how to go from
any
sequence of Unicode characters to the exact DOM that a conformant
browser
will (and most browsers already do) create when handed that sequence.
This is revolutionary: the implementation is now driving the spec.

> XML doesn't need hypermedia affordances to succeed in the tasks for
> which it was specified.  Does JSON?  Now that is quite a different
> argument from there being a useful set of hypermedia affordances that
> become the norm for all hypermedia applications on the web including
> those using XML or MicroXML.  I would understand John's reluctance
> to include them because he and James have envisioned different goals.
> Selah.

I'm refusing (not merely reluctant) to include them because I have
specified MicroXML namespaces to be the same, not merely in general
but in particular, as XML namespaces.  The XML Core WG owns the xml:
namespace and I don't, and they have already refused (with my hearty
agreement) to add xml:ref and friends to that namespace.  Q.E.D.

> Remember what orcs are made of.  Their souls aren't happy about it.

Tolkien was never quite consistent about this.  How is it that the
children of orcs are still orcs?

-- 
I now introduce Professor Smullyan,             John Cowan
who will prove to you that either               cowan@ccil.org
he doesn't exist or you don't exist,
http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
but you won't know which.                               --Melvin Fitting