Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Your answers are the type of answer I'm used to seeing when someone brings up the "data vs. document" debate that I consider meaningless. Data that a computer can process vs. data that a human can process? So are there people who utilize XML without the benefit of a computer doing some processing? Or are there places where XML documents are processed and never have to be viewed by a human? PS: I'd like to say thanks to the people who brought up the meaningful distinctions such as the tendency to eschew mixed content in data-centric uses of XML. ________________________________ From: Jonathan Robie [mailto:jonathan.robie@d...] Sent: Fri 6/6/2003 11:48 AM To: Dare Obasanjo; Martin Soukup; Simon St.Laurent; xml-dev@l... Subject: RE: YAML Ain't Markup Language At 10:51 AM 6/6/2003 -0700, Dare Obasanjo wrote: >I often here folks on XML-DEV talk about the distinction between >data-centric vs. document-centric uses of XML yet I've always failed to >see how these uses of XML are at loggerheads. This now seems to me to be >the typical XML-DEV posturing the advance an agenda. Data is information that a computer can process. A document is information that I can process. >Does anyone have any concrete differences between such uses of XML that >require such divisive terms as "doc vs data people". Sure. A document person is someone who doesn't appreciate the significance of using XML for data. A data person is someone who doesn't appreciate the significance of using XML for documents intended for humans. You can usually identify a document person when he calls someone else a datahead. You can usually identify a data person when he calls someone else a dochead. Then there are the XML people, who understand the significance of XML for both documents and data. Jonathan
|
