- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 06:51:44 +0000 (UTC)
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009, Kevin Benson wrote: > On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:10 PM, Ian Hickson<ian at hixie.ch> wrote: > > On Thu, 6 Aug 2009, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: > >> > >> "This specification defines an abstract language for describing > >> documents and applications, and some APIs for interacting with > >> in-memory representations of resources that use this language." > >> > >> The phrase "abstract language" concerns me. It's not clear to me that > >> a language can be abstract, nor is it clear to me what this phrase > >> refers to, especially since it seems to be distinguished from the > >> "concrete syntaxes that can be used to transmit resources that use > >> this abstract language, two of which are defined in this > >> specification." > >> > >> Perhaps there's some sort of abstract data model or information model > >> here; but I don't believe that the word "language" is appropriate to > >> describe this. Language as normally understood is a collection of > >> actual words or symbols, written or spoken. It is not a collection of > >> abstract concepts, at least not in any definition of the term I was > >> able to find. > >> > >> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=define%3Alanguage&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g10 > > > > What term would you recommend rather than "language" that is more > > understandable than "data model" or "information model"? > > > > Would "vocabulary" be ok? > > Rather than changing the word "language", how about changing the the > word "abstract" instead... ...to an adjective such as "prescriptive" or > "normative"... in order to describe the usage of the word "language" > more purposefully ? On Sat, 15 Aug 2009, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: > > "Vocabulary" may be an an improvement over "abstract language"--I'd need > to think further about that--but I think Kevin's suggestion is likely > better. The spec defines a language (not abstract) with two syntaxes (or > dialects, or variants). The word "abstract" is there to lead people away from thinking of HTML as being a concrete language in the sense that, e.g., C++ is a "language" or BibTex is a "language". I agree that "abstract" isn't really the right word, but omitting it I think would cause more confusion here. "Vocabulary" is wrong too, since it implies just a lexicon of words, rather than a grammar, content models, etc. If anyone has any ideas for a better term than "abstract language" that conveys all the richness that language does but without implying a syntax exists, please let me know. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 21 August 2009 23:51:44 UTC