- From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <len.bullard@intergraph.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 14:10:13 -0600
- To: www-tag@w3.org
Umm.. that's not exactly my concern, Harry. Sorry if it seemed that way from my posts. It is more along the lines of how to apply the principle given some particular system decision. This sort of thing becomes a problem for someone procuring a technology and the vendor that sells it to them. See Sarbanes-Oxley. We have contracts wonks here and in the Beltway and its analog around the world who take the W3C very seriously and cite this stuff without necessarily doing due diligence technically. Then it becomes my problem. Power to the user isn't my problem. Selling water by the river is. Dan and Henry are doing a good job with this by exploring the metrics. At some point, it needs to translate to something a proposal writer or consultant will understand, but first, the technogeekery pass is needed. (Maybe we think programmers select technologies; that is not nearly as common as one might want to believe particularly as the system buys get bigger.) BTW: the comparisons of XSD, RELAX, Schematron are alive on the XML-Dev list simultaneously. It is stated that RELAX is a superset of XSD. XSD is a superset of DTD. If I applied the principle literally, I'd be writing DTDs as I did in the SGML days. So in some way, the finding must express 'adequate to the job' and 'here's how you know if your language is adequate but no more than that'. Wow. This becomes the Peter Principle of Software. len -----Original Message----- From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] And then to address Len's concerns, one could state something along the lines of "By power we do not mean the subjective feeling of power particular programming languages or data formats give their users, but the amount of information a particular language tells us about the programs or data expressed in that language. By setting constraints as to what can be expressed and making themselves capable of being analyzed, certain languages while being less powerful in terms of Turing-completeness or other forms of power, actually give the Web more information about themselves when they can guarantee certain behavior. " And everybody wants more information about everybody else :)
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2006 20:10:27 UTC