Re: Images & mouseovers

by Christopher Higgs <c.higgs(at)landfood.unimelb.edu.au>

Date:	Thu, 28 Sep 2000 13:16:30 +1000
To:	David Meadows <david(at)heroes.force9.co.uk>
Cc:	hwg-xml(at)hwg.org
References:	idyllmtn mscounties abbeyink abbeyink2 idyllmtn2 idyllmtn3 idyllmtn4 astra workhorse edu
	todo: View Thread, Original

Just to play devils advocate :-)

At 23:53 27/09/00 +0100, David Meadows wrote:
>If he planned it properly to start with, his DTD would allow for new
>sections. That's basic software engineering. Analyse your business
>requirements and build a solution which matches it. A resume isn't very
>complex. It shouldn't take too much effort to come up with a DTD that covers
>everything a resume will ever need.

So you are saying that all files should validate.  How does this then fit 
with Namespace documents which cannot be validated?  Is this a flawed concept?
*eg*

>Yes, and have you ever tried to *do* anything with one of these monolithic,
>legacy, almost-databases? It's mind-numbing. They are good for one small
>narrowly-defined task. As soon as you have to use the information in a
>different way (and believe me, you always do), your overheads become
>untenable. If time was spent up-front analysing the information and properly
>structuring it, the information becomes much more useable, much more
>RE-usable, and generally much more valuable.

Many people without any understanding of databases manage to store their 
info in flat format for ages.  Yes, dealing with them after several year 
can be mind-numbng, but also profitable :-)

This assumes the person using them is capable of this.  You are assuming a 
level of expertise that may not be present.  The advantage of XML was that 
it was simpler.

Chris

HWG hwg-xml mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters