W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > October 2000

Words

From: Brian Smith <Brian.Smith@SOPHCO.COM>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 12:10:50 +0100
Message-ID: <D8B397AA9AA8D3119E7A000629386D09010370@ntserver1>
To: "'www-rdf-interest@w3.org'" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
To whom it may concern

I enclose a copy of a recent email exchange between Renato Iannella and
myself concerning the impenetrable, prolix writing style used within W3C
documents which I hope is found to be both provocative and worth doing
something about.

Best wishes

Brian Smith

************************************************************************
************************************************************************
********************************************


Brian, believe it or not, I agree with what you are saying.
Since being involved with RDF in the "early days" I can say that
it has turned out to be less useful than I had hoped - and overtaken
by "logic" people.

I suggest that your feelings about RDF be sent to the RDF Interest
Group list for discussion:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/

Cheers

Renato

--On 5/10/00 5:11 PM +0100 Brian Smith wrote:

> Dear Renato
>
> I'm trying to get my head round XML, RDF, Dublin Core and all the rest
> and I was drawn to your article "An Idiot's Guide to the Resource
> Description Framework".
>
> I don't know what Australian idiots are like but ours (and I include
> myself here) cannot handle sentences like "RDF is based on a concrete
> formal model utilising directed graphs that elude to the semantics of
> resource description". I know precisely what each word means but the
> sentence? Forget it.
>
> Is there no recognition amongst the W3C that we (employers) have to be
> able to find people who can use these developments; ie write code and
> such like. It is a complete waste of time academics constructing
systems
> which only a small percentage of the brighter population can deal with
> and no surprise to me that it is now nearly six years since the
meeting
> in Dublin, Ohio came up with the Dublin Core which you are still
trying
> to get off the ground.
>
> I am not stupid, I have worked in IT as a programmer, systems analyst,
> consultant etc since 1968 but I've just spent four days trying to get
to
> grips with this technology and I am baffled. Do you honestly believe
> that anybody could write more than, say, three of four lines of XML
> without making an error? Do you believe that a normally intelligent
> person could then easily find and correct the error? Do you believe
that
> a normal, sane person could have the first idea of what you are
talking
> about from reading the material from the W3C?
>
> Yours and your colleague's work is totally fixated with the almost
> religious purity of computing science and, as a result, I think you
are
> taking us back to the days of ASSEMBLER when programming was for the
> elite few because it was so damned difficult to do.
>
> I can give you lots more samples like the sentence I quoted earlier.
>
> "The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative is a cross-disciplinary
> international effort to develop mechanisms for the discovery-oriented
> description of diverse resources in an electronic environment".
>
> "The metadata ecology of the Internet will be partitioned into many
> modular niches, each targeted to particular functions or communities"
> Never mind the awful English, what does it MEAN?
>
> One more for luck, and this is a beauty so I've quoted it in full.
>
> "The great power of both XML and RDF is the ability for individual
> content providing communities to declare their own modes of expression
> for the description of resources of importance to them. However,
rather
> than having each community develop a comprehensive system describing
all
> aspects of their resources, XML and RDF offer a more interoperable
> foundation whereby a single description may comprise elements drawn
from
> any number of accessible recording practices".
>
> I've taken the liberty of italicising the more ridiculous phrases but
> I'm sure you'll get my point. It's almost as though the author was
> writing for a Social Sciences tract. We chaps in the real world need
> working, practical documents we can reliably and quickly understand.
>
> Surely you can see that you are taking us down a path we cannot afford
> to travel? Programming, systems development, call it what you will,
and
> whether it is for applications or text systems, must be open to the
mass
> of people or we'll all go broke trying to pay the wages of the few
> people capable of producing something.
>
> Come on, give us a break. Tell us a) what you mean, b) how we can use
it
> and c) how we can set standards for project quality and management. We
> need simple, memorable syntax and constructions which can be taught
to,
> and written by people of average intelligence and which can be easily
> and reliably checked, corrected and quality controlled.
>
>> From the heart.
>
> Best wishes.
>
> Brian E Smith
> Managing Director
> SOPHCO SYSTEMS LIMITED
>


Cheers...Renato                      <http://purl.net/net/renato>
Chief Scientist, IPR Systems Pty Ltd      <http://iprsystems.com>
...............................unlocking the value of information




********************************************************************
All emails from our post boxes are subject to verification by virus
checking software. The third party product we have selected has 
been installed and configured in good faith and is operated in
accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. While we have no
reason to doubt its performance or efficacy we have no influence or
control over these factors.

The content of emails from this post box may relate to commercial and
personal matters. If an email from this post box has been sent
without prior arrangement or is unexpected then care should be taken
before reading it or opening any accompanying attachment.

SOPHCO SYSTEMS LIMITED denies any responsibility whatsoever for the
content of any email sent from its email post boxes and recommends
the sender be contacted by other means in the event that an email
arouses suspicion or concern.

If you have received this email in error we would request that you treat
its contents as confidential and ask you to contact the sender
before disclosing them to any other person or organization. Such emails
should not be retained within your computer system or archive.
********************************************************************
Received on Monday, 9 October 2000 07:10:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:44 GMT