Re: ERB decisions on the LINKTYPE proposal
Rule of the Ricebowl: if only one or two people in an organization have
the solution to a problem, they will defend the problem.
Voodoo is making someone believe something to death.
> Jon Bosak wrote:
> Careful: I never said that *I* considered this language "voodoo",
> etc.; I said that most *users* would see it that way. Nothing you
> have said contradicts this basic psychological fact. The biggest
> single problem we have had in selling SGML over the last 10 years is a
> refusal to recognize user psychology as a valid concern. Let's not
> make this mistake again.
The biggest mistake of the last ten years has been a failure to
acknowledge that many "user psychologies" resulted from the
self-fulfilling prophecies of companies who sold competing systems.
One of the most damaging was: "SGML is too hard", when in fact,
"The SGML Way" was too hard and the software sold to
support it too expensive. Let's not make THAT mistake again.
Most of the jujuMasters of SGML are here. HTML is SGML
without "The SGML Way". It sells. Free software and a
"roll your own" language that anyone with an ASCII editor
can use always will sell particularly when attached to a
world wide media that gets immediate attention and new sales.
It is a lock-in phenomena of increasing returns: in
street language, the power of a siphon hose. This isn't
"superior technology and simple design" triumphing. This
is "400 acres and a mule to the first couple to put
down a flag". The Internet is the Oklahoma Teritory
after the government sold the mining rights and decided
the Indians weren't worth the soldiers. Selah.
The adoption of XML will neither be rapid nor overwhelming.
The immediate market for XML is in users with lots of SGML
they want to deliver via the Web. Even if LINKTYPE is not
the "ideal" answer, it won't scare anyone with that resource
type. User psychology doesn't seem to be an adequate reason
not to use LINKTYPE.