Re: [xml-dev] markup humility

[Peter Flynn <peter@silmaril.ie>]

On 17/02/2022 12:06, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> Over the past few decades, I've seen wave after wave of people who
> think that the tools we have created here are a virtuous version of
> the One Ring, a single tool that will help humankind catalog and
> communicate everything in a neat and logical way, eventually binding
> them together to form a more coherent future.

XML just wants to help, precioussss.

> We just needed one more layer to make markup universal, whether it's
> graph structures, namespaces, a schema language, an enhanced
> transformation language, a new data store, modeling tools, adoption
> as a default format by popular enterprise (and consumer) software, or
> the world waking up to the magic we have to offer...

I think the originators of the CELT project were painfully aware of the
problem of bloat, which is why the project sticks strictly to its
objective of marking up the historical texts in XML/TEI and making them
available so that others can add whatever bells and whistles they wish.
 But yes, the constant stream of additives is always going to be there,
I think.

> For much of the world, XML and its related technologies are a
> lingering bad memory.

I think this can happen with any public specification that gets seduced
into dubious behaviour in areas outside its original remit, when there
is no gatekeeper to say "go away, this is not for you". Testing stuff in
an unforeseen way is a valuable proof of something, I'm sure, but it
does risk poisoning the water.

> I hope that someday the SGML-to-XML cycle will begin again, that we'll
> sort through the piles we've hoarded with a different eye to produce
> something smaller and more useful. 

Personally, I'd need to see evidence of a major change in the underlying
technology to enable it being done differently. That may, of course, be
just round the corner: there is no shortage of Real Soon Now™ candidates.

> Getting to that, though, likely means that we have to want to do
> less, not more.

It usually requires more effort to do less, alas.

Peter