Re: On the Expressive Power of Declarative Constructs in Interactive Document Scripts

Dear Steven & public-xformsusers,

Considering its date of writing (2019/04/26) and last change (2019/07/12):
if I have not been missing since then, the document has not been this list
since then...

Berner-Lee, T, "Linked Data Shapes, Forms, and Footprints"

It discuss technologies to help with building apps on top of data: shapes,
forms, and footprints...


https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Footprints.html

Regard,
Guntur Wiseno Putra

Pada Sabtu, 07 Desember 2019, Guntur Wiseno Putra <gsenopu@gmail.com>
menulis:

> Dear Steven and public-xformsusers,
>
>
> It is about "codes" which may be inspiring:
>
> There is J. Pickels's word "geo-coded world" and there is also J.
> Derrida's words "contamination of codes": A quotation made by M. A. Cheetam
> in his "Kant, Art, and Art History" (Cambridge University Press, 2001)
>
> "The grafting of one art on to another, the contamination of codes, the
> dissemination of contexts, are... moments of what we call history".
>
> Cheetam referred to Derrida, Jacques, 1989. " Fifty-Two Aphorisms to a
> Foreword." In A. Papadakis, C. Cooke, and A. Benjamin, eds.,
> "Deconstruction: Omnibus Volume", 67-69. London: Academy Editions.
>
> Regard,
> Guntur Wiseno Putra
>
> Pada Kamis, 17 Oktober 2019, Guntur Wiseno Putra <gsenopu@gmail.com>
> menulis:
>
>> Dear XForms Users and Steven,
>>
>> Closely related with "mapping" , thus supposedly with XForms in its
>> values, it is an article "Cartographic Turn?" (Levy, Jacques, 2012)
>> considering development over the last decades and the "spatial turn" in the
>> social sciences, geography, its innovation, its new gap with cartography,
>> technological apparatus regressive and old-fashioned, and a disciplinary
>> reconcilliation. The article proposed thus
>>
>>  " a re-thinking of the philosophical basis of cartography, to be
>> achieved by tapping Leibniz and Heidegger’s concepts of space, in order to
>> turn the map into the expression of a dialogical systemism able to
>> represent relationships in social world".
>>
>>
>> To refer to this post (ISO 690)
>> <https://www.espacestemps.net/en/articles/a-cartographic-turn/#>
>>
>> Jacques Lévy
>> <https://www.espacestemps.net/en/auteurs/jacques-levy-english/>, « A
>> Cartographic Turn ? », *EspacesTemps.net* [En ligne], Works, 2012 | Mis
>> en ligne le 27 February 2012, consulté le 27.02.2012. URL :
>> https://www.espacestemps.net/en/articles/a-cartographic-turn/ ;
>>
>> Regard,
>> Guntur Wiseno Putra
>>
>>
>>
>> Pada Rabu, 16 Oktober 2019, Guntur Wiseno Putra <gsenopu@gmail.com>
>> menulis:
>>
>>> Dear XForms Users and Steven,
>>>
>>>
>>> Forgive me for missing to include the complete article at my earlier
>>> message (without other parts of it) while I gave its link address...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regard,
>>> Guntur Wiseno Putra
>>>
>>> Pada Rabu, 16 Oktober 2019, Guntur Wiseno Putra <gsenopu@gmail.com>
>>> menulis:
>>>
>>>> Dear XFormsUsersvand Steven ,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As an example it is mentioned how XForms is made to facilitate mappings
>>>> (among others Steven Pamberton, "Declarative Applications" mentioned
>>>> above): I finded what is supposedly an interesting article "Maps for the
>>>> Future" by C D'Allessandro-Scarpari discussing a book by J. Pickeks, "A
>>>> History of Spaces. Cartographic reason, mapping and the geo-coded world",
>>>> 2003.
>>>>
>>>> Beginning by reasoning such a relation between Geography, geographers,
>>>> and map --thus existing research and reflections on map--
>>>> D'Alessandro-Scarpari identified a uniqe perspective proposed by the book
>>>> which was among others an investigation about spatial consequences of
>>>> technological changes.
>>>>
>>>> The book was said about the processes of map-making and map-using
>>>> issues. The book interpret geography as an action of delimitation
>>>> constructing objects: the technical, social, and spatial changes affecting
>>>> cartographies, express the need for such discourses on ethics of practices
>>>> and cartographic goals.
>>>>
>>>> To the present situation named globalization, the book concerned with
>>>> the matter of mapping the world at any scale, rethinking theory and methods
>>>> of "globalized sites" The book suggested a way to work on a kind of
>>>> cartography:
>>>>
>>>> "For the author the technology is just an input for future changes:
>>>> map-making and map-using processes are more deeply transformed by the
>>>> social and spatial dynamics".
>>>>
>>>> Such a concern given to the collectives involved in every particular
>>>> space: a geography of collectives...
>>>>
>>>> https://www.espacestemps.net/articles/maps-for-the-future/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Maps for the future.John Pickles, *A History of Spaces. Cartographic
>>>> reason, mapping and the geo-coded world*, 2003.Cristina
>>>> D’Alessandro-Scarpari
>>>> <https://www.espacestemps.net/auteurs/cristina-drsquoalessandro-scarpari/>
>>>>
>>>> [image: Image1]Geographers’ relations with maps have a long story of
>>>> attraction and repulsion. The map has always fascinated Geographers (even
>>>> before the institutionalization of the discipline) as a powerful tool, able
>>>> to demarcate territories, to produce different visions of them and to
>>>> transform them by the actions they may cause or influence. Sometimes for
>>>> strategic reasons Geographers have also denigrated cartography as a
>>>> secondary and technical form of knowledge, a tool merely for understanding
>>>> and representing spaces. At the present time the production of maps is
>>>> becoming at the same time easier (because of the technological advances
>>>> available today for making maps) and more complex (because of the high
>>>> complexity of spatial contemporary dynamics). Anyone can buy software and
>>>> make his/her own maps and those maps can be constantly updated. If one can
>>>> visualize them from different points of view (adding or removing layers of
>>>> data and changing combinations); then the delineated territories are not as
>>>> stable as they were in the past. Spaces, networks and borders are submitted
>>>> to multiple rapid social processes at different scales and maps show their
>>>> limits representing this complexity.
>>>>
>>>> The existing research and reflections about maps and cartography can
>>>> roughly be divided into two groups. On one hand, is the historical enquiry
>>>> about the role of maps: David Woodward, Franco Farinelli and Christian
>>>> Jacob are three notable examples of this historical effort. On the other
>>>> hand, there are major contributions concerned by the graphic semiology and
>>>> semiotic of maps: Emanuela Casti or Jacques Bertin contributed to the
>>>> explanations of what maps show and how they produce spatial knowledge. In a
>>>> different way both these traditions are interested in the links between
>>>> maps and politics at the local, national or international levels. The
>>>> originality of this book is certainly not in underlining the central role
>>>> played by maps in building empires: nevertheless, *A History of Spaces*brings
>>>> something unquestionably new in the way geographers study maps and the
>>>> processes of map-making and map-using. Novelties exist on at least three
>>>> levels: the most visible aspect is the capacity to cross a geographical
>>>> analysis with a deep philosophical background; John Pickles does not limit
>>>> his views to conventional mapping but is concerned also with cyber-maps and
>>>> digital spatial representations; lastly the author suggests an exciting
>>>> intellectual and scientific challenge for future practices of mapping.
>>>>
>>>> A diversity of approaches in his intellectual background gives Pickles
>>>> a unique perspective by combining a deep philosophical interest, an opening
>>>> to Western European classical knowledge and to contemporary scientific
>>>> productions, a geographical approach to globalization issues and also to
>>>> post-communist fragmentation in Eastern Europe, environmental concerns,
>>>> African experience and an investigation of spatial consequences of
>>>> technological changes. John Pickles can be broadly defined as a cultural
>>>> and social geographer, interested in political and economic processes
>>>> investing territories and places, with an approach certainly influenced by
>>>> Lefebvre. Philosophically he is close to the phenomenology of Althusser but
>>>> also to Deleuze.
>>>>
>>>> *A History of Spaces* is certainly about geography and maps, but it is
>>>> mainly a questioning of the processes of map-making and of map-using
>>>> issues, the dynamics of production being more important than the result
>>>> itself. If one may be tempted to state that the histories of spaces are
>>>> limited in this book, then the social and spatial aspects linked to
>>>> cartography are constantly present. The text is divided into five parts.
>>>> After an introduction, the second part focuses on the deconstruction of
>>>> maps, in a double technical and social sense: contesting the crisis of
>>>> representation it criticizes cartographic reason and taking into account
>>>> the social practices it develops a situated pragmatic. The third part is
>>>> about mapping and political territories in the modern period and it
>>>> introduces the following part, about cyber-empires in the contemporary
>>>> digital maps. The last part, the fifth, discusses the counter-mapping and
>>>> the maps of future.
>>>>
>>>> The 233 pages of this book present an important number of figures, 46
>>>> black and white illustrations more precisely. But contrary to what one can
>>>> expect in a book about mapping and spaces, the majority of these figures
>>>> are drawings (24). With the reproduction of recent and old maps one is able
>>>> to find also paintings and pictures. In spite of the variety of
>>>> illustrations and of their importance in the text, there is no color in the
>>>> book, except for the monochromatic blue cover, the image representing a
>>>> French painting showing the attempt to adjust the technique of perspective.
>>>> Maps, then, are not always the most efficient tool for representing spaces.
>>>>
>>>> What is geography if it is not the drawing and interpreting of a line?
>>>> This is the question developed as an introduction in Part I. From its Greek
>>>> etymology, *geo-graphy* indicates the drawing of the world, but for
>>>> the author this action of delimitation creates new objects. Following Jean
>>>> Baudrillard, for Pickles (from Part I and throughout the entire book) maps
>>>> precede territory; they inscribe boundaries and construct objects that in
>>>> turn become our realities: instead of representing the territory, they
>>>> produce it. Map-making and map-using are described as individual and social
>>>> processes at the same time: the production of maps is not only a technical
>>>> act, but above all an interpretative action, in which the result conveys
>>>> also the author’s intentions, conditions and values. Nevertheless, maps are
>>>> made because of the needs of particular social situations, to fulfil a
>>>> particular action (Part III gives some political and economic examples).
>>>>
>>>> From this perspective the technical, social and spatial changes
>>>> affecting cartography cannot be reduced to the supposed ‘crisis of
>>>> representation’. This expression (questioned in Part II) is for the author
>>>> a way to express the need for a debate about the ethics of practices and
>>>> cartographic goals. As the crisis of representation develops, the recent
>>>> technological innovations are more a way to interrogate future social
>>>> transformations than an object of study. New technologies of mapping and
>>>> new uses for maps have accompanied the reworking and recoding of social
>>>> life. Consumers for these new products and practices have been produced and
>>>> new mapping metaphors have been deployed to promote the penetration of
>>>> these technologies into everyday life. With imaging and visualizing
>>>> technologies, the goal of analytical abstraction and purification can be
>>>> accomplished in ways that create abstract spaces of transparent objects.
>>>>
>>>> We have the tools for rendering the world-as-picture in the 21st century,
>>>> but the territories, submitted to globalization, are not as easily marked
>>>> and separated as in the past. Globalization challenges how we map the world
>>>> at any scale, but particularly it calls for rethinking theory and methods
>>>> about ‘globalized sites’. John Pickles notices that we need new
>>>> cartographies, carrying new pragmatics of map-making and map using. These
>>>> new cartographies might produce mappings that speak their situated and
>>>> selective interests and that record their metadata and political
>>>> commitments. But these cartographies also need a new openness for producing
>>>> dialectical, dynamic and metaphorical images; they must be able to
>>>> integrate rhizomatic spaces (rhizome being used according to Deleuze and
>>>> Guattari), between local and global, concrete and abstract (Deleuze and
>>>> Guattari, 1983), by the process that Felix Guattari calls the fabrication
>>>> of individual and collective assemblages of enunciation.
>>>>
>>>> At the end of the book Pickles suggests an interesting way to work on a
>>>> new kind of cartography. ‘It may be possible to develop new cartographies
>>>> and geographies only by changing the way we think about the cartographies
>>>> we have’ (p. 194). For the author the technology is just an input for
>>>> future changes: map-making and map-using processes are more deeply
>>>> transformed by the social and spatial dynamics. Isn’t that an interesting
>>>> lesson for the actual gis concerns about production, use and limits of
>>>> this technology’
>>>>
>>>> But the entire book may also be interpreted as an invitation to
>>>> geographers to shift their gaze from the gis technology to the
>>>> collectives involved in every particular case. ‘These collectives are all
>>>> alike, as I have said, in that they distribute both what will later, after
>>>> stabilization, become elements of Nature and elements of the social world.
>>>> No one has ever heard of a collective that did not mobilize heaven and
>>>> earth in its composition, along with bodies and souls, property and laws,
>>>> gods and ancestors, powers and beliefs, beasts and fictional beings’
>>>> (Latour, 1993, p. 107). gis permit to visualize and study collectives
>>>> of humans and non-humans: for the writer of these lines the new geographies
>>>> mentioned by Pickles are precisely the geography of these collectives
>>>> (linked to the new cartographies). This alternative mapping, or
>>>> counter-mapping, is a public participation in the mapping process, where
>>>> the public is not only human, but constituted by collectives.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regard,
>>>> Guntur Wiseno Putra
>>>>
>>>> Pada Selasa, 15 Oktober 2019, Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
>>>> menulis:
>>>>
>>>>> The word 'model' in XForms refers back to the model-view-controller
>>>>> (MVC) paradigm that originally appeared in Smalltalk. However, in XForms
>>>>> the idea is somewhat more generalised: in MVC the relationship between
>>>>> model and view is one-way (from the model to the view) and the controller
>>>>> is responsible for the flow in the other direction. In XForms the
>>>>> relationship is two-way, with constraints and invariants achieving much of
>>>>> what the controller would have been needed for, although Events and Actions
>>>>> allow you to add your own effects where they are not supplied automatically
>>>>> by the system.
>>>>>
>>>>> In retrospect, the word Form might have been a good choice instead of
>>>>> Model, in the sense of Form and Content.
>>>>>
>>>>> Steven
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 14 Oct 2019 19:19:53 +0200, Guntur Wiseno Putra <
>>>>> gsenopu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear XFormsUsers and Steven,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It may be inspiring:
>>>>>
>>>>> So it is about "model"...? as "the word is used in so many different
>>>>> ways in common parlance as well as in academia" (Patterson, Z.,  "Model",
>>>>> 2008: discussing the word in relation with social science) ...?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.espacestemps.net/articles/model/
>>>>>
>>>>> Until the MarkupUK 2019 it is still said that the components of XForms
>>>>> are the model and the human interface (Steven Pemberton, "Declarative
>>>>> Applications").
>>>>>
>>>>> https://homepages.cwi.nl/~steven/Talks/2019/06-07-markup/
>>>>>
>>>>> Regard,
>>>>> Guntur Wiseno Putra
>>>>>
>>>>> Pada Rabu, 09 Oktober 2019, Guntur Wiseno Putra <gsenopu@gmail.com>
>>>>> menulis:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear XForms Users & Steven,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To share what may be inspiring (May we say what are below...?):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Somewhere a city of networks, those networks of languages, ones learn
>>>>>> on how to navigate it, how to work it out by such a strategic spatial
>>>>>> planning: thus there is a multiplanar methodology...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.espacestemps.net/en/articles/strategic-navigation/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regard,
>>>>>> Guntur Wiseno Putra
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pada Rabu, 02 Oktober 2019, Guntur Wiseno Putra <gsenopu@gmail.com>
>>>>>> menulis:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear XFormsUsers and Steven,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> XForms, Networks of Languages, and Architecture...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As we are trying to say architecturally about "XForms" regarding
>>>>>>> with"networks of languages":  may we imagine such buildings "Plan of Pope
>>>>>>>  Sixtus V for Rome in Italy,1585", "Yi Yuan (Garden of Contentment) in
>>>>>>> Suzhou, China, 19th century" and "Plan for Washington D.C., USA, 1792" with
>>>>>>> their network configurations of the path (Ching, F.D.K, "Architecture:
>>>>>>> Form, Space and Order", John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2007, pp. 276-277)...?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regard,
>>>>>>> Guntur Wiseno Putra
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pada Rabu, 02 Oktober 2019, Steven Pemberton <
>>>>>>> steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> menulis:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 01 Oct 2019 17:32:50 +0200, Guntur Wiseno Putra <
>>>>>>>> gsenopu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dear XForm Users and Steven,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To share what may be inspiring:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is known that there are architectures of machines and systems
>>>>>>>> regarding with computing technologies: does it sound fantastic if there is
>>>>>>>> a language supporting those architectures...? --a language by which we may
>>>>>>>> work out the architectures...? --thus we may build or renovate machines and
>>>>>>>> systems using the language...?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Of a reading, "architecture" consists elements "form", "space", and
>>>>>>>> "order": does XForm language -- together with, if there are,  XSpace and
>>>>>>>> XOrder-- embody part of such an architectural programme...? --or at least
>>>>>>>> potentially...?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In XForms, the form is provided by the model, the order by the
>>>>>>>> content in the body, and the space by the CSS.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Steven
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regard,
>>>>>>>> Guntur Wiseno Putra
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pada Selasa, 01 Oktober 2019, Steven Pemberton <
>>>>>>>> steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> menulis:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It struck me that we should be making a collection of references
>>>>>>>>> to all papers about XForms.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please reply to this message with examples you know that should be
>>>>>>>>> included. I will collect them all together.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Steven
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 01 Oct 2019 15:40:30 +0200, Steven Pemberton <
>>>>>>>>> steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> By John Boyer.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Contains an XForms implementation of quicksort.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ABSTRACT
>>>>>>>>>> It is difficult to generally compare the succinctness of
>>>>>>>>>> declarative
>>>>>>>>>> versus imperative programming as source code size varies. In
>>>>>>>>>> imperative programs, basic operations have constant cost, but they
>>>>>>>>>> tend to be more verbose than declarative programs, which increases
>>>>>>>>>> the potential for defects. This paper presents a novel approach
>>>>>>>>>> for a
>>>>>>>>>> generalized comparison by transforming the problem into comparing
>>>>>>>>>> executed code size of a benchmark imperative algorithm with
>>>>>>>>>> a partially declarative variant of the same algorithm. This allows
>>>>>>>>>> input size variation to substitute for source code size
>>>>>>>>>> variation. For
>>>>>>>>>> implementation, we use a multiparadigm language called XForms
>>>>>>>>>> that contains both declarative XPath expressions and imperative
>>>>>>>>>> script actions for interacting with XML data within web and office
>>>>>>>>>> documents. A novel partially declarative variant of the quicksort
>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> presented. Amortized analysis shows that onlyO(n) imperative
>>>>>>>>>> actions are executed, so the expressive power of the declarative constructs
>>>>>>>>>> is at least Ω(logn). In general, declarative constructs can
>>>>>>>>>> have an order of magnitude expressive power advantage compared
>>>>>>>>>> with only using basic imperative operations. The performance cost
>>>>>>>>>> factor of the expressive power advantage was determined to be
>>>>>>>>>> O(log2 n) based on a novel dynamic projection from the
>>>>>>>>>> generalized tree structure of XML data to a height balanced binary tree.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://dl.acm.org/results.cfm?within=owners.owner%3DHOSTED&
>>>>>>>>>> srt=_score&query=10.1145%2F3342558.3345397&Go.x=0&Go.y=0
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>