• From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@h...>
• To: "'Michael Kay'" <mike@s...>, "'Rick Marshall'" <rjm@z...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:26:14 -0600

I remember what my first computer science prof taught us in 1971:  "Don't
worry about the formal correctness.  If it runs, it's right.  Let the
computer teach you."

In those days, computers didn't disagree because very few programs written
on one would run on another one.  See what interoperability gets us?  Fire
breathing flesh chomping foot stomping philosophy spouting dragons.

Back to animation where if it runs and is close to the same color, it's
right.

len


From: Michael Kay [mailto:mike@s...] 

> It's more like a classification thing. The structure 
> determines the category or "family" - eg it's a car. The 
> constraints determine the classification - it's a Toyota 
> Camry which can come in these colours only etc .... The 
> conforming instance defines the individual.

Sounds Aristotelian: Essence and accident?

Tricky ground this. We could spend the next 2500 years debating it.
Territory best not entered by those without formal training in metaphysics
(like me, who has read just about enough to know that here be dragons).

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

• References:
  • RE: Rick Jelliffe quotable quote on the purpose of schemas
    • From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>