Subject: Re: Formatting Objects considered harmful From: Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 17:40:35 +0100 |
Hi Simon. You point is well made, however.... What the end user is getting is a view of the data. They get that either for free, or by paying for it. If they hit "view source" what they are now after is the semantic, which again they get either free or by paying for it. If the intent is to give them this for free, then give them semanticaly meaningful formating, maybe XML+CSS. In such a case you might concentrate well on exactly what semantic you are giving them here as opposed to the semantic used within the application domain. If the semantics used are not free, then using FOs gives a company a safe wall here, a semantic firewall if you like. In many cases, it simply will not be relevent. And the end user will not care. All they will care about is what's infront of their eyes. I can only speak from my own expereince, and at Dialog a large part of what the punter is maying for are Dialogs "semantics" and paying big, seperate and apart from any view of data purchased. I mentioned it once before, but it warrants mentioning again within this context, that publishing of XML on the Net, along with easy transformation making data theft untraceable makes corporate data *very* vulnerable on the Net to being syphoned off and repackaged. Unless you can provide companies with at least the method of keeping hold safely of they semantic organisation and management of data (the things that allow them competitive advantage in accruing data), *their data will not go on the Net*. It may interest you to know that Dialog is the worlds largest online information provider. Certainly the marketing doctors claim it possesses *many* times more data that the Net (::shrug:: I wouldn't know, but it's a rediculaoously large amount). Unless it is safe to do so, my *guess* is you will never see a fraction of that data on the Net. There is the misguided notion that the Net is all encompassing... *there is more data off the Net than on the Net*... I would personaly like to see more data go on the Net. I would say that the Net *is* balkanized at the moment, in that it isn't getting the high quality structured data. I would like to see that changed. *All* these comments are purely my own speculative opinion, and in no way constitute the position of The Dialog Corporation, either in whole or in part. Cheers Guy. xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 04/22/99 07:41:25 PM To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx cc: (bcc: Guy Murphy/UK/MAID) Subject: Re: Formatting Objects considered harmful At 12:35 AM 4/19/99 +0200, H?kon Wium Lie wrote: >> > - XFO documents don't contain the semantics of the XML/XTL source > >For many, this is a feature. "Don't tell them what internal formats we >use!" "Let them pay for semantics, if they want it!" "Hey, it looks >fine to me!" Thus we lose most of the benefits XML offers to the Web - searchability, reuse, free exchange of information. And since there is a 'legitimate' business need to be served here - a way to have an XML site and make a profit off those who want enhanced features - I'm sure we're going to see this happening a _lot_, if FO's are supported widely. It's ironic that FO's - a single vocabulary for presentation - have more potential (in my opinion, anyway) for 'balkanizing' the Web than raw XML's many voices. Simon St.Laurent XML: A Primer Sharing Bandwidth / Cookies http://www.simonstl.com XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: Formatting Objects considered h, Bovone Stefano | Thread | Re: Formatting Objects considered h, Simon St.Laurent |
Re: Formatting Objects considered h, Paul Prescod | Date | About a DataChanel and Isogen merge, Didier PH Martin |
Month |