- From: Elliotte Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 15:52:18 -0500
- To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- CC: www-tag@w3.org
Norman Walsh wrote: > In order to preserve the self-describing nature of the web, it has > been proposed that we define an "XML-functions" approach to > determining what information content can be understood from an XML > document that is grounded in the web. We can not, and should not try, > to assert that all XML documents are grounded in the web, we need only > provide a framework for allowing authors to, in the common and usual > case, publish XML documents that *are* grounded in the web. I could quibble with a lot of details, but I have two main concerns with this: 1. It's not at all clear to me where you're going with this, or what you hope to achieve. 2. I'm not sure I believe it's productive to attempt to standardize, define, or otherwise mandate any particular interpretation of information content in XML. (In fact, I'm pretty sure I don't believe that.) I tend to think we should not define any approach to determining what information content can be understood from an XML document, whether grounded in the Web or not, whether XML-functions or not. Different consumers of the same XML documents are likely to have different understandings of those documents based on their own needs and experiences, and that's OK. In fact, it's more than OK. It's reality, whatever the specs say. Bottom line: the reader of a document is ultimately responsible for understanding the document. Different readers will understand different things. The document author cannot force the reader to understand any particular thing. Author's intent does not outweigh the reader's presumption. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu XML in a Nutshell 3rd Edition Just Published! http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian3/ http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596007647/cafeaulaitA/ref=nosim
Received on Tuesday, 3 January 2006 20:52:28 UTC