W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > April 2004

Re: complexity (was: Re: XHTML and RDF)

From: Orion Adrian <oadrian@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 13:34:51 -0400
To: www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <BAY1-F59uCzU0vXyulG00031d81@hotmail.com>

>From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
>To: "Orion Adrian" <oadrian@hotmail.com>
>CC: www-html@w3.org
>Subject: Re: complexity (was: Re: XHTML and RDF)
>Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 19:28:46 +0200
>
>* Orion Adrian wrote:
> >Admittedly I'm venting. I'm venting because I'm frustrated with how the
> >specs have turned out. And I'm dissappointed with how the specs turned 
>out
> >for a lot of technologoies. XLink, RDF, OWL, XML Schema are just a few. 
>I'm
> >dissapointed with little oversights that could have made these truly 
>usable
> >to me, but they just aren't.
>
>All you need to do is to come up with something better and convince the
>community, ideally early on the W3C Recommendation Track, but there is
>of course nothing wrong with developing Technologies outside W3C.
>Leaning back and complaining does not yield in better technology.

I am also free to write another linux variant, but I understand who makes 
the rules. Even given a superior spec, it's unlikely that my version will 
get attention. Relax NG is a far superior implementation of a schema 
language (from my perspective), but most people have either never heard of 
it or never used it. I know the W3C is the primary location most people go 
to. I won't delude myself into thinking otherwise.

I actively participate on multiple groups and I write essays on the topics 
on how to make things better from my viewpoint. However I am limited to the 
public discussion forums because I am not willing to put for 5,000+ USD for 
a membership. However like the spam posted to many of these lists I feel 
ignored.

> >Thanks for the link. My desire for simplicity is for authorship first and
> >implementation second. Why? Because these documents are going to be 
>authored
> >a lot more often than implemented.
>
>But note that comlexity for implementations likely reduces the quality
>of the implementation which would make authoring more difficult (hacks,
>workarounds, alternate documents, etc) these two notions of simplicity
>depend on each other most of the time.

Yes and I always believe that you can simplify the implementation by 
simplifying the core idea structures first. It also usually improved 
authoring too. What I'm saying is that many, many of these specs are 
actually just bad. Not that they sacrifice a for b, they lose both.

Orion Adrian

_________________________________________________________________
Tax headache? MSN Money provides relief with tax tips, tools, IRS forms and 
more! http://moneycentral.msn.com/tax/workshop/welcome.asp
Received on Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:35:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:00 GMT