Simon,
I shudder at "...it's just an extraction problem...."
Switching from one ontology to another must just be a mapping problem. ;-)
If those are both "...just..." type problems, why do you think data
scientists keep talking about transformation of data being 80% of what
they do?
Transformation requires an understanding of both the target and source
formats. Or should I say understanding the semantics of both formats?
Sure, if it's well-formed XML, all manner of things are fairly trivial,
if you just knew which ones to do.
In the interest of disclosure, I have seen any number of academic
projects that differ from other projects because they have special need
#1 or #2 or .... To be honest, not really. They typically are encoding
their texts to be different so it works with their tool set (which they
developed), etc. That may not be everyone's experience but it certainly
is mine in the humanities.
I'm not claiming my experience is universal and others may have
different stories to report.
There certainly are other ways to create vendor lock-in, such as writing
your own database software. (Or HR software, I understand the Pentagon
has some 6,000 such systems.)
You may be right, whether encouraged or not, bad behavior (lack of
interoperability) will occur. Still, the lack of same creates a lot of
wasted time and effort.
Enjoy the sunshine, endure the jetlag!
Patrick
On 04/22/2018 06:04 PM, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> On 4/22/2018 5:50 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
>>
>> Well, let's say you create an extension to a popular word processing
>> format that provides enhances the content, but only if used with your
>> software.
>>
>> Isn't that a form of vendor lock-in, even if practiced by an
>> individual contractor?
>>
>
> No. Every use of XML is talking to yourself in a form convenient for
> certain processing tools. Assuming that the rest of the world should
> understand your mumblings is a strange (if often profitable) conceit.
>
> There are so many options for vendor lock-in beyond file formats these
> days that I don't think leaving a schema open deserves a mention.
>
>> Being mindful of a Netware installation many years ago where the
>> "backup" copy of the boot disk was in fact delivered blank. Not
>> discovered until after the contractor had pulled up stakes and moved
>> to Arizona.
>>
>> True, you could still read the XML but the costs of re-creating a
>> one-off application from scratch could be, not necessarily would be,
>> prohibitive.
>>
>> Yes?
>>
>
> If the XML was especially deranged, and you needed every detail of
> what it might have meant, perhaps. At some point obfuscated markup
> resembles encryption. (That can be true even with a complete schema
> and documentation, though people tend to confess such things only in
> bars.)
>
> Normally, though, it's just an extraction problem, amenable to guesses
> and XSLT (or similar).
>
>> Hope you are having a great weekend!
>>
>
> Sunshine and jetlag. Who could ask for more?
>
> Thanks,
> Simon
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> 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
--
Patrick Durusau
patrick@durusau.net
Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)
Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau