W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-change@w3.org > June 2015

RE: Advancing the GCT Proposal

From: Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 14:26:26 -0700
To: <public-change@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00bf01d0a87b$1c05f2a0$5411d7e0$@acm.org>
Well, Toto, we are not in Kansas anymore.

I have no idea what this is all about and I hope that it is not intended to be a meaningful conversation on the CTMarkup list.

The only thing I see in this particular screed is a claim that change-tracking and XML documents that are change-tracked be subject to domain semantics.  

In terms of something actionable, I am not certain what the recommendation is.  Could it be one of,

 1. A generic mechanism is useless?
 2. A generic mechanisms is useless without an accommodation of domain considerations?
 3. Domain considerations must be dealt with from the get-go? 
 4. There is some domain of interest that folks have a shared interest in seeing served?

I think looking at a generic mechanism that accomplishes what it accomplishes is fine.  

To the extent that one needs to know an application domain to correctly change an XML document (with or without tracked changes), GCT is not enough.  

That's like saying programming language grammars are not context free, yet providing context-free grammars for them, along with separately stated semantic conditions/constraints is of great value.  I think one approach is to view GCT the same way -- as a context-free treatment that is always valid, but the semantic constraints that limited it beyond syntactic matters have to be known to have produced it properly.

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Gannon Dick [mailto:gannon_dick@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 11:56
To: dennis.hamilton@acm.org; Owen Ambur
Cc: 'Alejandro Revuelta'; George Bina; 'Robin LaFontaine'; Betsy Fanning; public-change@w3.org; Joe Carmel; 'Paul Maassen'; 'miska knapek'; 'Owen Ambur'; 'Crispin Butteriss'; 'keefe murren'; 'Joseph Foti'
Subject: RE: Advancing the GCT Proposal

re: XML Change Tracking / Acronyms / Open World Assumption / Semantics

My Take ...

When Gutenberg invented the Printing Press the commercial innovation which was crucial to acceptance was not the Press, it was the similarity of the font to Illuminated Manuscripts, the only book format available at the time[1].  This presented a commercial challenge to Scribes but not competition to Civil Authority Functions.


Data Processing for the convenience of Computer Science and IT has outlived its usefulness with respect to data analytics collection.  The no-style style of XML requires that "changes" both track and echo originating domain (community) conventions.  Governments have government expert friendly conventions which override complete freedom of response in the policy feedback loop (The Open World Assumption).  So, analytics suffers, and policy suffers from lack of coherent feedback.

[ ... ]
Received on Tuesday, 16 June 2015 21:26:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:11:23 UTC